Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21); Blog post: Of Slipstreams and Sensor Ghosts (09/24/21)

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 - truecore

Pages: [1]
1
First off, I'd like to say I am glad you're working to bring these ships and content of Ironclads to everything outside that mod! The balancing loads must be quite heavy, but I've wanted to play space America and step on the Hegemony for a while so I've taken to testing it out. Here's my feedback for you, I'll try to keep it organized.

Overall, Interstellar States (henceforth "ISS") ships are a bit quirky. Currently, they seem to be missile and squadron oriented ships whose turrets are quite short-ranged, being almost all 800su or less. I believe ISS ships could use a balance pass on: OP, Flux, and Crew. Most weapons and squadrons cost roughly the same, meaning there's not much variation in OP costs for various designs. Having fit each of the ships, I can say that there's usually not enough OP left remaining to put in the hullmods that I want. Flux seems off-balance, in part because of issues with weapons, however for the *most* part I believe that most ISS ships never need to see an OP sink in their Flux Capacitors or Vents. Exception to this is the New Mexico, whose intrinsic flux dissipation is so low (300, lower than any other) that she spends the better part of 30 seconds venting. For balance, I think that OP should be boosted on all ships by at least 15% to allow room for hullmods mods and capacitor/vent spending. Carriers should get a 25% boost, as I think squadrons should have an OP hike. I think flux values are currently fine, except that New Mexico needs a dissipation bump of ~200 to be in line with most other carriers. Regarding Crew; maximum crew values for ISS ships are incredibly low, so low that casualties from squadron losses mean I expect to be left with insufficient crew after most fights, and I've started bringing along Starliner's to ensure I have enough crew to keep the F-61's dying. I think giving specifically carriers higher maximum crew values will make up for pilot losses better.

I recommend OP cost increases on several squadrons, and also rethinking roles of several as some are very redundant with each other.
Bomber role:
B-202: The Hellfire torpedo range is too short to be effective and Piranha SRM's launch from too far away to distract PD. Overall, doesn't have high enough alpha to be worthwhile compared to the AC-300 and A-110. My thoughts: give it Phase rather than Shield, increase range and speed of Hellfire, boost damage of Hellfire, increase ordnance cost.
Assault role:
A-110: Well balanced. High damage, high casualties. Has a weird issue of firing rockets at enemy fighters, missing, and hitting friendly ships instead.
AC-300: Same rocket issue as above. Fills same role as A-110, but doesn't die as much. Considering the damage output and survivability differences, it's OP cost should be at least 16.
Fighter role:
F-61: Weaker than the Talon but at 2.5x the OP price. The Talon applies damage better, which I figure is because the Vulcan cannon fires at half the range (250 vs 500), does 25% more damage per shot (25 vs 20), and has 100 more shell velocity (800 vs 700). Watching the two, you see the F-61 spraying (its 300 round limited magazine) and usually inertia and shell physics results in it missing its target. I think the F-61 could be fixed by boosting the fighter-specific 20mm, or by giving the F-61 the Gunnery Control AI hullmod, or dropping the OP cost to 2 to be in line with the Talon.
F-135: Twin blasters. Unlike the 20mm which is fragmentation, this is energy, so does 100% damage, applying the pressure you need to shields. Personally, I'd replace the two blasters with a single centered autoblaster for aesthetic reasons and give it a Piranha SRM. At 8 OP, these are way too cheap; in testing, 6 squadrons of these from a New Mexico could easily take down a Paragon with minimal losses/impact to replenishment rate. These should be closer to the 12-14 point cost range.
MQ-90: Fills the same role as F-61 but significantly better; no crew casualties, losses don't impact replenishment rate, high recovery rate, blaster is better than 20mm at both anti-fighter and anti-ship, only 3 OP more.
F-171: Phase fighter with "support" role cannot distract opposing ships PD and only rarely uses EMP missiles against ships. As an anti-fighter support fighter, this fighter works great until its flux gets high, after which it spends more time trying trying to phase than it does shooting.

Otherwise: I think the F-61 should be assigned the support role; it's the only squadron whose gun does Fragmentation damage, and is equipped with anti-fighter missiles, so is relatively useless at anything but fighting other fighters. I also wonder if the MQ-90, being a "defense drone," was supposed to be support.

Weapons:
I believe ISS energy weapons are in a good place. Their ordnance cost, flux cost, damage, and range are all well balanced. I believe the missiles need another look, though. First, missiles; at the high end, many of the large missile slots have max ammo and reload times, except for Whaleshark and Tigershark, which only have 1-2 rounds each depending on the variant equipped. At 22 OP, 2 shots is not worthwhile. I think that they are missing a reload time. Going down to Medium and Low missiles, the max ammo/reload times are gone. Instead, each missile is relatively low OP, but has insignificant ammo and no reload time. Hellfire Torpedo Launcher at 12 OP with 4 shots doing 2k each, while Typhoon Reaper Launcher has 5 shots at 4k each at 10 OP. The Hellfire small torpedo, at 6 OP with 1 shot and 2k damage, compared to the Reaper at 2 OP, 1 shot and 4k damage, is probably the worst example.

I have mixed feelings towards the projectile weapons. They lack any flux cost, making ISS ships potentially quite flux efficient, and I think this could lead to wonky combo's, but that's not bad for the game.

Last thing; ship_data.csv shows the strikecraft as having "isa_bp, interstellarstates" in their tag field. I don't think either is necessary in the ship_data.csv file, since the correct field for that data is in wing_data. Because isa_bp is in the tag field, I am able to construct squadrons as "ship hulls" as well "fighters" as from the production menu.

2
That'd be the definition of feature creep. Mechanics like that aren't Starship Legends' job.
Well... i'm not demanding it? it's literally a suggestion. The author can say "no" and so that's it. If the author feels like i'm harassing him then just tell me and i will shut. By the way, is there a mod that have such feature? that's like you said, do something that's not "starship legends' job"?
Well, to provide a counter-argument, I know many, many, many veterans who get into fights at bars with nobodies. Usually, the nobody is the type of drunk that constantly feels emasculated by someone elses' strength, and feels the need to beat them to prove their own power. Other times, they take issue with the politics that surround the military, and project that onto the veteran. Either way, the fame and power of the veteran become the target of the others animosity.

A pirate might seek to fight someone famous to prove themselves. They may take issue with how the famous person rose to power. They might think that the famous person is just famous because it's a fluke. Or, they might not care about the combat reputation, and just see the wealth and go for that. Fame is no reason at all to dissuade people from coming after you. If anything, fame means even more, and usually stupider, people will try.

3
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.1.18a
« on: July 14, 2020, 01:38:06 PM »
Thanks. I'm working on an update, it's just a lot of backed-up balance fixes and some new/replacement content that's taking a good long time to come together.
Well, I'd just like to plug in a request for a centerline turret-focused DME battleship somewhere down the road. The Zelenograd seems a lot like an up-scaled Apogee, but better, which also makes it feel less like a warship. A missile battlecruiser, like a space Kirov, would be interesting.

Also, I'd be curious to know if it's possible to add a new Outpost "industry" for the DME outposts as an alternative to the high-tech, midline, and what not. My last Nexerelin playthrough, I was governing a DME colony and found it only slightly immersion breaking that I had to build a high-tech outpost rather than the DME one.

That's strange. It shouldn't matter whether the prefix is present or not in the ID, unless you did something odd with another ID somewhere.
No, on the fresh install I had not changed any of the fields except removing "istl_" from a couple bp packages on the special_items.xls. From my limited understanding of modding, I also can't figure why a prefix would cause problems with console commands, because other mods like vayra's aren't having similar issues for me, and its not even an issue for all of the DME bp packages. Anyways, off the bat, I can say that the faction is still spawning its ships just fine, the only thing I can think that might have broken is the items might not drop on exploration. I don't know that that is tied to the ID fields though.

Anyways, if it's not an issue on your end, then I'll consider it a personal fix for a rare issue for now and just mention that it happened in case anyone else has a similar issue~ Cheers and thanks for the great mod and being responsive!

4
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.1.18a
« on: July 14, 2020, 12:44:10 PM »
Hello, first off just want to say I love your mod, the style of the ships is great and really gives me a Earth "space force" feel. I have a lot of faction and ship pack mods plugged in, though, and I wanted a better chance to find the capitals among hundreds of potential bps, so I went and made a custom blueprint package called "istl_dmecapital_package" with similar rarity and value as the deserter package, gave it order 224, included the 2 DME capitals and the weapons not included in the other blueprints, and tried spawning it in game. Initially, I received a "sigma matter" item. I renamed the blueprint to just "dmecapital_package" and was able to spawn it in successfully.

While testing the new bp package, I tried spawning the others and also received sigma_matter_all for several of the packages, even after renaming the new capital blueprint. Figuring I messed up the mod, I went and deleted the mod and reinstalled it. On the fresh 1.18a, I'm still only able to spawn istl_dmecore_package, istl_dmeadv_package, and istl_bladewood_package. The 6th bureau, civil, ballistic, energy, deserter, missile, and refit packages all give me sigma matter (actually, the bureau package gave me "secure data" commodity and I believe missile gave me "sigma matter 2")

The strange part is, I renamed all the blueprint packages that weren't working by removing "istl_" (except deserter package, because that package successfully spawns with the deserter start on nexerelin anyways) and I'm now able to spawn them in with console commands.

My question is...has renaming these to allow them to spawn via console broken anything else anywhere in the mod? And is there any reason for this problem in the first place?

5
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Tahlan Shipworks 0.3.16
« on: July 10, 2020, 02:52:45 PM »
Apologies, I felt I should due diligence and went and updated all my libraries and did a fresh reinstall. LazyLib 2.4f, ZZ GraphicsLib 1.4.2, MagicLib 0.29 and Tahlan 0.3.16 are the only active mods, ZZ and Magic being the one's that needed updating - I initially had a crash Fatal Error problem with the commie Castigator file not appearing, so I re-downloaded and plugged in the Tahlan mod on the fresh install and it works fine now, no problems.

So, the problem was just that the libraries were out of date, and I suppose it's a reminder to have Version Checker active/make sure the prerequisite mods are up to date before posting about a problem.

6
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Tahlan Shipworks 0.3.16
« on: July 10, 2020, 01:21:57 PM »
I just loaded your mod in, and got this. Definitely your mod because it doesn't happen before, or after.


I got the same. I went through the process of turning all mods off then back on again and narrowed it down to Tahlan, specifically the newer update as when I go back to a previous version it works fine.

7
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Better Colonies 1.3
« on: December 29, 2019, 11:31:36 PM »
Bug report for you:
Stations are no longer upgrading. Certain stations are missing pieces: High Tech orbital station is missing the ablative armor module that goes in the gap between the shields. When replacing a station of one tech level with another station, that does not work. In cases where pirates/luddites build stations, they only ever have one module functioning. In cases where stations are destroyed, they remain destroyed.

I'm running it with: Console Commands 3.0, Nexerelin 0.9.5h, Graphics Lib, Magic Lib, Lazy Lib, Hyperdrive 1.1.0, and Second Wave Options 0.4.1 and it's replicable on my end. I can get screenshots showing where the sprite does not match the map graphic (map graphic is a true representation of the station as it appears in battles, I've spawned fleets to test how the stations appear in combat)

All in all, it's making me very sad because I love the mod. But it's incredibly challenging to face late game fleets with nothing but Orbital Stations defending everything.
Can you replicate without any of the mods aside from Console Command, LazyLib, and Better Colonies?
Unfortunately, yes. I'm not able to take screenshots in the game, windowed or not, to show you however. But I see clearly that the High Tech Station replaced with Mid Tech is still showing as a High Tech on the map as well as in battles.

8
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Better Colonies 1.3
« on: December 29, 2019, 03:25:41 AM »
Bug report for you:
Stations are no longer upgrading. Certain stations are missing pieces: High Tech orbital station is missing the ablative armor module that goes in the gap between the shields. When replacing a station of one tech level with another station, that does not work. In cases where pirates/luddites build stations, they only ever have one module functioning. In cases where stations are destroyed, they remain destroyed.

I'm running it with: Console Commands 3.0, Nexerelin 0.9.5h, Graphics Lib, Magic Lib, Lazy Lib, Hyperdrive 1.1.0, and Second Wave Options 0.4.1 and it's replicable on my end. I can get screenshots showing where the sprite does not match the map graphic (map graphic is a true representation of the station as it appears in battles, I've spawned fleets to test how the stations appear in combat)

All in all, it's making me very sad because I love the mod. But it's incredibly challenging to face late game fleets with nothing but Orbital Stations defending everything.

9
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Kadur Remnant v3.0.4 - Caliph Cleanup 2019-08-29
« on: December 19, 2019, 01:24:33 AM »
Hi there Vayra,

New to the forum, came to say I love your mod but also have a simple problem I've wondered if you've noticed... so first things first, I like the theme. The Kadur faction is incredibly difficult to play, which is actually quite fun. I like the themes and I also like the weapons, I also like how the blueprints are actually available. Thematically, it feels a lot like Israel, past or present I can't tell, but the struggle is real. I also like that the faction is Cruiser focused. The graphics for the weapons are fantastic, and I can't help but trying to put them on all my HiTech ships projectile slots.

Now, my issue is mostly with how the AI is handling the Kadur ships. Kadur comes with some of the longest range projectile weaponry in the game, yet even with Cautious captains, the Falchion and Sphinx are very, very prone to committing suicide. I think it's because the AI does not understand that their Mass Aug Ram Jets ability kills them, similar to how Burn Drive does, rather than being a proper defensive ability, and so while I've fit my ships with long range weaponry and officers to support them, they Ram Jet right into the face of any Onslaughts they see. Needless to say, this doesn't end well. They often even use the ability to ram me when I assign them to Heavy Escort, particularly in minor situations like when the AI would normally be using shields to avoid damage on collision. Since Kadur is a Cruiser-focused faction, I can't really perform well in campaign without being able to rely on the AI - right now I'm having to avoid using the Falchion and Sphinx in the campaign and focus on Eagles and Targe's instead, or use the Sphinx as a heavy flanker, which is a bit order intensive.

I have a few mods, but aside from Nexerelin they're all ship mods that shouldn't be messing with AI. Maybe you could let me know if you've had this experience?

Pages: [1]