Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1

Mods / Re: [0.97a] Kaleidoscope - Increased visual planet variety

« on: March 25, 2025, 10:07:26 AM »

Save Compatible

Download
Requires LazyLib
Requires LunaLib

Or support me on Ko-Fi

This mod adds over 70 new planet textures to the game to increase the variety of planets you can find. It also adds some variations to the planet types that exist, but no new ones and no new conditions (get Unknown Skies for that!). Naturally comes with new planet descriptions for the more unique variants.

For instance: Desert planets will spawn as salt desert, basalt desert or brine sea planets - or as normal desert, using one of the alternate "desert" textures included in the mod. This applies to most planet types.

The mod does not increase the amount of planets, and does not* change any existing planets. It is purely visual.
*except for two types.

Image Examples

And more!
The original textures used can be found here

[close]

To install the mod, simply download the .zip file from the link above, unzip it in your Starsector mods directory, and enable it in the launcher.

Can be added to ongoing games, but is not safe to remove from ongoing games.

There are currently no known compatibility issues with other mods.

Change Log

1.0.b

Adjusted - Some descriptions Fixed - Duplicate resource conditions on metal planets

1.0.a

Added - Initial Release

[close]

Attribution / Acknowledgement

pixel_rice_bowl		Made the planet textures and provided them to the community.
Lukas04		Helped with obfuscated code.

[close]

Ask before using my code.
The planet textures are entirely free to use: Link

I know this isn't the purpose of this pack, but I had the thought go through my mind of what if unknown skies had a compatibility patch for additional stuff besides the visuals for these.

2

General Discussion / This might be a dumb question.

« on: March 21, 2025, 09:44:07 AM »

Do enemy ships actually have their potential capacitors and flux vents filled out for their loadouts? Because I don't really know if they do or not.

3

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.98a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: February 16, 2025, 10:00:20 AM »

... unique onslaught with gigacanons would be both hilarious, and an utter downgrade . Now I want them in game somewhere!

The Supreme Executor know best, the Regime knows best.

4

Mods / Re: [0.97a] Valkyrians - EN Edition

« on: January 03, 2025, 08:23:20 AM »

no download link in github, only source code...

5

Mods / Re: NEON's Ship Pack

« on: August 31, 2024, 04:31:08 PM »

That is some neat art for the ships there.

6

General Discussion / High Scatter Amplifier, yay or nay?

« on: March 26, 2024, 10:58:18 AM »

I like the fact that it makes beams deal hard flux, especially for high intensity lasers and tachyon lances. The range decrease doesn't seem to be that noticeable, plus it increases damage by a little bit. How is it in your experiences? Any more Niche uses you like for it? Is it a good hullmod for your beamer ships?

7

General Discussion / Re: EMP damage mechanics?

« on: February 29, 2024, 11:00:37 PM »

It's quite technical.  There is a wiki page that explains it as well as can be explained.
https://starsector.fandom.com/wiki/EMP

Some of the principals:

• Weapons have a "health" bar of 250/500/800 depending on small/medium/large turret.  If it's a hardpoint, 2x that health.
• Engine health is significantly more complex based on the plume size of the engine; engines with a larger burn trail have more health.
• The damage applied is based on the distance from the point of impact on the hull to where the weapon or engine is actually located.  As an example, a shot directly hitting a weapon that is mounted on the edge of a ship's hull will deal 100% damage.  A hit on the outer hull versus a weapon that is mounted at the absolute inside center of a ship will deal mostly no EMP damage, absent arcing.
• Repair time for weapons is fixed depending on mount type.  9/14/20 seconds for turrets, +5-7 seconds more if it is hardpoint (remember hardpoints have twice the HP).
• Repair time for engines is based on ship class, 9/13/16/22 seconds for frigate/destroyer/cruiser/capital.

All of this is modified by various hullmods.  Resistant flux conduits half EMP damage, Automated Repair Unit halves repair time (or 1/4s it if built-in).

Regarding "how much is enough", a lot of it depends on tech type.  Enemy is low tech, no shields, frigate/destroyer ships that have weapons mounted near the outer edge of the ship sprite?  Not much EMP damage is needed, they haven't shields to protect, and their weapons and engines are very vulnerable due to being so exposed, a few blasts from ion pulsers are probably enough to wreck havoc.  Enemy is high tech, 360 degree shields, capital ship with lots of its most punishing weapons mounted safely in the core of the ship sprite?  Ion pulsers probably aren't going to do much, you'll need shield piercing ion beams / tachyon lances that will throw EMP arcs even when shields are up that can hop from the ship's outer edge into the ship's core where the weapons are.

Also, the targeting analysis elite skill grants double the weapon/engine/emp damage so you can go beast mode with like ion pulsers.

8

General Discussion / Re: What, exactly, is the point of ore?

« on: February 29, 2024, 07:12:59 AM »

You can make the most profit out of ore by ejecting it and loading something else. As far as player is concerned it's mostly a fluff item, as in "Yes, this is a mining station, it has ore".

Ore, so unprofitable the only way you can profit from it is by throwing it in the trash like the trash it is.

9

General Discussion / Re: [0.97a - RC8] Old Sabot can be added back again, let me explain why

« on: February 27, 2024, 02:24:49 PM »

Honestly, just re-release it as a renamed weapon with visual change. Call it the rapier or something and have it be basically a shield equivalent of the reaper with it's own balance niche.

10

General Discussion / Re: Stealth and a lack of sensor arrays

« on: February 21, 2024, 08:50:14 AM »

Do you have phase ships and/or insulated engines hullmod (and augmented drive field too)?  Use phase ships and/or smaller ships with Insulated Engines.  You may need to change the fleet.

A fleet with a profile of 100 or less can easily sneak into heavily guarded worlds or objects.  Of course, changing the fleet from general-purpose with random ships to a specialized stealth fleet can be annoying and/or tedious, I get that.

Yeah, I might need to try that. I have been trying to do a tritach SC run so that is why I have been wanting to ask this. Advice is nice. :3

11

General Discussion / Stealth and a lack of sensor arrays

« on: February 21, 2024, 08:24:20 AM »

So, I get a lot of smuggling/stealth missions close to military worlds in star systems without sensor arrays. How am I supposed to navigate these when there are 3-5 fleets consistently at the planet all the time? Sometimes I try to do the old sensor ping and run technique, but it either doesn't work and they immediately go back to the target world, or I see another fleet insta-spawn.

12

General Discussion / What would hard mode/sector large mode be like?

« on: February 15, 2024, 09:30:00 PM »

Since this gets mentioned occasionally due to these 2 settings being seemingly an incomplete set, I wanted to ask this question. How would both of these variables work if implemented?

My guess for hard-mode/star-farer mode would be increased fleet sizes and more occurrences of S-mods in enemy fleets. That and/or perhaps reduced resource salvage rates and less ship recovery chances?

Maybe large sector sizes has constellations/nebulae that are double size, with a bit of an increase in the sector north/south distances?

I think these are basic guesses. If there are more interesting ideas I would like to hear them.

13

Suggestions / Re: fleet cowardliness/indecisiveness towards Ziggurat

« on: February 15, 2024, 01:31:27 PM »

Makes sense, yeah. Oftentimes I'll just grab the fast stuff and rally it off to the side somewhere, and then cancel the rally at what feels like the right time. That seems to work pretty well, though I hadn't tried it against the Ziggurat. No matter what you do there, small ships are going to be in some real danger!

At least they make the ziggurat waste motes and time .

14

Suggestions / Re: fleet cowardliness/indecisiveness towards Ziggurat

« on: February 15, 2024, 01:19:07 PM »

Yeah, i think they might be just having trouble keeping up with each other so they don't quite arrive at the same time. It just kinda feels awkward that smaller ships just go head-on and thus waste themselves before they could drive their normal support/gap filler things. Might need to rely more on escort orders during it next time.

15

Suggestions / Re: fleet cowardliness/indecisiveness towards Ziggurat

« on: February 15, 2024, 01:13:57 PM »

I think it has something to do with how ships are calculating what "can" go in to fill the surrounding area. Since some of these ships are pretty big and slow relatively speaking in terms of size categories, since the high tech ships have speed as the thing they do besides a paragon. I used eliminate/full assault and engage but that doesn't seem to affect how well they try to sync up together.