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); In-development patch notes for Starsector 0.98a (2/8/25)

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 - justnewaccount3131

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Mods / Re: [0.96a] Ashes of The Domain
« on: July 22, 2023, 08:57:57 AM »
I know, none of the options I can see are from AotD. Where is the option for hiring researchers? If it's supposed to be in the Galatia dialogue tree, then I wonder if there's an unintended interaction between IndEvo and AotD that's causing the option to not appear.

Mod list
AoTD versions:
Seat of Power 1.0.3
The Sleeper 1.1.2
Vaults of Knowledge 1.3.2

IndEvo version: 3.2.c UNOFFICIAL

{"enabledMods": [
  "starpocalypse",
  "afleettestingmod",
  "pantera_ANewLevel20",
  "advanced_gunnery_control_dbeaa06e",
  "aod_capital",
  "Cryo_but_better",
  "aod_core",
  "automatedcommands",
  "lw_autosave",
  "battletechportraitpack",
  "timid_admins",
  "better_variants",
  "ORK",
  "CaptainsLog",
  "combatactivators",
  "chatter",
  "lw_radar",
  "lw_console",
  "dmodservices",
  "DetailedCombatResults",
  "pt_exiledSpace",
  "fleethistory",
  "fleet_journal",
  "GrandColonies",
  "hostileIntercept",
  "illustrated_entities",
  "IndEvo",
  "Imperium",
  "lw_lazylib",
  "leadingPip",
  "logisticsNotifications",
  "lunalib",
  "MagicLib",
  "more_procgen_names",
  "more_ship_names",
  "wisp_NeutrinoDetectorMkII",
  "nexerelin",
  "officerExtension",
  "planet_search",
  "portrait_changer",
  "pt_qolpack",
  "assortment_of_things",
  "refitfilters",
  "roider",
  "RustyCabbage_SecondWaveOptions",
  "bruh_ship_browser",
  "PT_ShipDirectionMarker",
  "speedUp",
  "stelnet",
  "Terraforming & Station Construction",
  "timid_tmi",
  "There_will_be_no_ID_2",
  "variants_lib",
  "WEAPONARCS",
  "whichmod",
  "audio_plus",
  "ezsadditionalcharacternames",
  "shaderLib",
  "ShipCatalogVariantEditor",
  "Clean_Sector",
  "System_Marker"
]}
[close]

you stumble upon researchers like you do with freelance administrators and such. station coms

2
Modding / Re: [0.96a] [REMOVED] Enhanced Portraits
« on: July 22, 2023, 08:02:16 AM »
Unfortunately the mod download had to be removed, as it conflicts with the forum rules regarding AI generated assets.

I have great respect for the people who made this game, so I wouldn't want to do anything they didn't approve of.

I'll leave this thread up.  Perhaps when the law regarding AI generated content is settled the rules will be reconsidered.

Thanks to everyone who checked it out, and especially those who replied with kind words.

Official Decision;
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=27431.msg407303#msg407303


you can post your work to the unofficial discord and to any of the mod sites.
the insane, shortsighted censorship of the tools one is allowed to use does not apply everywhere.

you did amazing work that could not have been done by hand - proving how idiotic the decision is.

3
General Discussion / Re: This Forum's Stance on AI-Generated Content
« on: July 21, 2023, 11:19:19 AM »
If it's trained on proprietary code/non-public domain code/code that it was not allowed to be trained on for public use, then that would probably be out too. Training it on the Starsector api docs would be ok as long as it's for the purpose of making Starsector mods.

As you say, it's a similar scenario, though I think art and code are quite different. A for loop is a for loop in a way that's quite different from the way different artists would paint, I don't know, a door knob or whatever. But the legal and ethical aspects seem similar, and afaik that's still getting worked out, and likely to be for some time.

(I reserve the right to change my mind on this; AI code is not something I've thought much about and this is just my initial reaction.)

your initial reaction is to react, not to think about it?

your game is as successful cause you gave a guy who made a video a free code for the game. the other reason are modders being able to mod.
what happened to that guy? I think very different about you now.

your stance is draconian and completely baffling. it is like you think you can stuff a genie back in the bottle by smashing some modder's head in for acknowledging its existence.
your game has this idea that copyright and DRM killed a civilization in part. AI is the way to counter copyright and DRM. if everyone uses a technology that makes everything a mix of everything, nobody can DRM it.

you became the thing you fought against

4
Mods / Re: [0.96a] Ashes of The Domain
« on: July 21, 2023, 10:58:56 AM »
Was just about to download the update, and had to log into my old account to ask, what do you mean by the new AI policy? I'm curious and don't think I've heard about it.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=27431.0

SirHartley's mod containing only AI images is still on here and has been for a month. I think you misread what is allowed.

here's his mod. he's one of the main modders of this game https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25649

-- if that doesn't convince you, just DM me the download link as a message please. I love your work and I'd like to test that new mod

5
Mods / Re: [0.96a] Ashes of The Domain
« on: July 21, 2023, 10:54:50 AM »
Due to new AI policy Vaults of Knowledge and Lost Glory download link has been removed from forums untill replacement for ai arts will be completed as showcase grab here new arts of artisinal subisidised farming and fishing




so if you use AI art in a variant of that mod, you can upload it somewhere else and we can download it?

just don't link it here then. link to where you can link it

6
General Discussion / Re: This Forum's Stance on AI-Generated Content
« on: July 21, 2023, 10:51:36 AM »
I hope all of you understand that AI art is a complete game changer for the smallest teams and something huge corporations will get to use anyway, whether frowned upon, illegal or not.

nobody will ever be able to prove Microsoft or Amazon sued AI in something.
and even if, nobody will punish them, if it is made illegal.
and if someone tries to, they have better lawyers.
and if they get punished, it will be 1% of one percent of what they got out of it by using it in the first place.

HSBC, one of the biggest banks on the planet laundered billions for Mexican drug cartels. nobody went to jail, nobody even got a slap on the wrist. there was no punishment.
The Sackler family who is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, if not millions and unimaginable suffering due to opiate addictions they caused *knowingly* as proven in court, never got punished. they lost a bit of money, but kept billions they made from their crimes.
US and international banks caused the 2008/2009 market crash where millions of people lost their homes and their retirement and not one person went to jail, even though they knew what was gonna happen. the tax payer was forced to bail out the criminals that never got punished.
I could go on for pages upon pages.

AI is not a even crime. it is not even a moral issue, not more than what photoshop did to hand drawn drawings, paintings and so on. but even if it became criminal, *they*'d still use it.

all they want from you is a tacit acceptance of making use highly restricted for ordinary people, and free for corporations, governments and whoever else pays enough.
you understand that any tiny group of individuals can with future AI art replace the crappy movies in cinemas today, or create insanely detailed games, or illustrated books, animations and so on.

they are afraid of that. the people that control markets now.

don't help them with this by parroting their talking points
did the US government or the Chinese create such a storm of disapproval for using AI on facial, vocal and genetic recognition? this is astroturfed outrage. they want your consent.

openAI trained its chatGPT on your private emails, on your books and forum posts. they want to be unchallenged in their early mover advantage. they are grandfathered in into any restrictions. in fact they are pushing for these.
same with midjourney.

why should a modder not use something these corporations are free to use? Marvel did the intro to their new garbage series "Secret war" with AI. but modders are supposed to not use it? are you freaking kidding me?

7
Mods / Re: [0.96a] Ashes of The Domain
« on: July 20, 2023, 09:19:31 AM »
Ashes of The Domain - Vaults of Knowledge Patch 1.3.2  Save compatible for ver higher than 1.0.2  Ssd is back
Spoiler
Buff : Crystalizator produces 2 more units of Metal
Buff : Artisinal Farming produces Luxury Goods
Buff : Isotope Seperator produes 2 more units of Transplutonic Metal
fix: Fixed that improve section in Terminus displayed 2 time s
fix: Fixed that militarized or civilian overwritten quality of ships by changing how much hulls they produce
buff: To compenstate for producing less hulls Militarized produces more weapons than before and civilian even more supplies
buff : Buffed production of Oribtal Skunkwork Facility so quality is not overwritten
fix :probably finally fixed pop up messages
fix: Fixed bug with pollution appearing on station using Aotd heavy industries
[close]

thank you! this is one of my favorite mods!

(for Linux: Biotics.png still needs renaming ->biotics.png)

8
General Discussion / Re: do imports have an associated cost?
« on: July 19, 2023, 11:34:47 AM »
I really like that starting with a nice low hazard world, then branching out to the high-hazard mining hell-world actually makes money sense! Its a nice bit of emergent storytelling.

I think it may make sense if you know what you're doing... I don't really :D 

but I chose the only second planet in system for a military base... but since I play horribly, I almost went broke -- hadn't played in 2 years or so and forgot a lot of the basics

@Aeson
well, I play Nexerelin, and it seems at least that having many colonies is pretty alright

9
The only faction that uses blueprints are pirates so selling them on military markets is pointless beyond giving you more cash. Selling weapons won't have any impact either. The best way to improve a faction would be to sell them a Pristine nanoforge on one of their planets with heavy industry or orbital works.

thank you!


10
I am on Nexerelin with no random core enabled

I want to help out a faction in trouble for RP reasons.

I already sold them a few high value blueprints, but they're still there in the Military side of the colony in which I sold them.

would selling weapons help?

there is no shortages or something obvious. they immediately used the farming nanite artifact I sold them on the colony -- so I know that stuff works. is there an Item that solves pollution? There is something in my mods that can get rid of it, but it seems the faction right now at least has no money to build it.


thanks!

11
General Discussion / Re: do imports have an associated cost?
« on: July 18, 2023, 12:26:55 PM »
Upkeep credit costs at colonies are reduced in proportion the amount of required trade items that are supplied in faction, scaling from 100% to 50%.  So if you are importing everything, then you pay full upkeep.  If you import 50% of your required inputs, then your upkeep is 75% of what it would otherwise be.  If you supply everything in faction, then your upkeep is only 50% of what it would be otherwise.

It is a more noticeable effect on high hazard worlds, since hazard rating multiplies into upkeep costs as well.

You can look at this by I think by hovering your mouse cursor over either Hazard Rating or Credits/month and hitting F1.  I forget which one exactly.

So if you want to think of the upkeep costs as partially buying the materials, then yes, you get them "cheaper" in faction.

that's really helpful. I got a colony that's kinda expensive to run

thanks Aeson for the reply too!

12
General Discussion / do imports have an associated cost?
« on: July 18, 2023, 11:33:16 AM »
I'd likely do it just for RP reasons, but it seems like having to imports things costs nothing. which, if true, would kinda take me out of the game a bit.

I understand that it's probably like that cause otherwise a whole lot of the simulated economy would need completely new balancing and an insane amount of work and I am not asking for anyone to do that. (I'm always up for deeper economy models in games, but that's not the topic of this post)

I just wanna know if there is a hidden penalty or anything that makes it better if you supply goods you need yourself.

thanks!

13
Modding / Re: [0.96a] [NEW!] Enhanced Portraits
« on: July 15, 2023, 08:01:20 AM »
they look really good!

14
Mods / Re: [0.95.1a] Volkov Industrial Conglomerate 1.5.8a
« on: July 14, 2023, 06:15:04 PM »
is there any way to prevent the crash from hovering over a mod of this faction?

I know the update is in the works, and it looks great but meanwhile, I am just asking if there's anything I can do to at least stop this issue -- the only one I am having.

thanks!!

15
Modding / Re: [0.96][WIP] United Aurora Federation 0.74a1
« on: July 14, 2023, 05:57:57 AM »
problem:
the 120 day bounties are way too short, especially missions that require you to return with a new deadline.

for RP reasons, I wanted to do a lot of missions for UAF - despite running my own independent colony in Nexerelin w/o random core.

so I went to UAF territory, which is quite far away, took as many missions as I could and tried to do them in time. I could barely do 2 - one of them being right in a neighbor system.
120 days is simply not enough.

the biggest reason for this is a "break this guy out from a pirate base" mission. after you do the breakout, you have to *return* in a crazy short time span considering the distances. which voids all other missions that require further travel in the opposite direction (all of them unfortunately).

my fleet does 20 in hyperspace and I could not even get back in time for the return mission after buying fuel and supplies - which took quite a while due to some markets being in trouble.

I think this *surprise new deadline with travel obligation!!* is not a UAF issue specifically - it's a horrifically bad designed quest blueprint from the base game, I assume (never give the player a surprise new deadline with a surprise distance to travel. seriously: why does it matter *after I break the guy out* when I return him? -- just tie the reward to the return and the player WILL do it.)

but the 120 days is something that UAF could maybe change? specifically since the system is always far away from the core, and doing missions for the faction without gate travel is completely unfeasible. the gas prices alone eat up the quest reward, and the reputation increases are minuscule for the time investment, so the only reason to do them is RP it feels like, unless you play as the faction.

the most efficient way to do it is repatriate a whole lot of prisoners that you collect elsewhere, go to UAF, do that, grab all missions, leave and come back a year later and so on -- that's what it looks like at least.
too much efficiency can make it a lot less fun


solutions:

one way to solve it is simply increase the rewards significantly, but it *feels bad* to have one faction give way better rewards, even if it makes sense in the context. this is not the game for such a solution.

a better way would simply eliminate the timeframe completely, or at least triple it. kill missions send you to a map corner very often, and from UAF you take most of the time getting there. you can't stop and explore a system on the way, you can't fight anyone, cause that costs supplies and so on.
it punishes you from playing the game basically.

a more involved way that adds some RP:
tell the player the pirate/criminal you got to get rid of is there for 200 days, and after that, the faction's intel agency will update you on the location -- it's gonna be in a starsystem that borders the original one. but for exact location, you have to build a communication satellite somewhere, or have to be in a system that already has one. then you get a new *important* message that updates the location of the quest target.
 
I may just post in Nexerelin or maybe as a suggestion for the base game -- but I think chances are slim this gets implemented. the last idea seems it's too much work.

I think this is the wrong place for it. but I really don't know. 120 days seem "ok-ish" for unmodded Vanilla in a sector with standard size when the starting point to go anywhere is always the center. but the game is getting way too big for 120 days limits.

maybe it's like the 120 days is just a "max" setting in some json file and one can just triple that and UAF will automatically apply "max" since the system is far away?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5