1
General Discussion / Re: Ai cores turned into anime cats...
« on: July 26, 2023, 11:17:56 AM »
Based on name alone, I am going to guess "yunruweebshitcombopack" - possibly "yunruLooseFiles" if it's same author
Fractal Softworks Forum
- September 23, 2023, 01:00:31 AM
- Welcome, Guest
News:
Starsector 0.96a is out! (05/05/23); Blog post: Wormholes and Sundry - Getting Around the Sector (08/31/23)
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.
Pages: [1] 2
2
General Discussion / Re: IR Autolance and Proximity Charge Launcher issues.
« on: May 15, 2023, 03:36:55 PM »@Dwarrfslayer
I can double check, but when I tested it a couple days ago auto fire without a target always chooses ships over fighters.
Okay so I can see what might be the difference in perception - because the Autolance avoids shields I am wading into a fighter screen of shielded carriers with lances zapping broadswords left and right - possibly you are getting behaviour with unshielded or shields-down ships and it's targeting a higher priority vessel?
I generally am using Autolances on an Executor just to mitigate fighter swarms, if a ship goes down shields in range it's dead usually so that would be a reason I don't see the lances focusing them for too long and they are free to zap fighter wings incoming
Tested it again. Testbed is a shrike vs sim light support condor. The shrike will shoot the Autolance at fighters, until it gets in range of the condor, at which point it will only shoot at the condor until it moves out of range again. The Autolance rarely fire's due to condor's shields being raised.
The autopilot is controlling the missile slot, and the Autolance is set to auto fire so it's not an A.I. control issue. Version is the latest, Hotfix: 0.96a-RC9.
Edit: Exact loadout is following. Expanded missile racks, ITU, expanded magazines, and IPDAI. Four burst PD lasers, IR Autolance, Typhoon Reaper Launcher. 12 Capacitors.
Changing weapon grouping does nothing.
Okay, then it's due to the AI targeting the carrier as all the lances will focus the targeted enemy - I'd been piloting my ship so it was just autofire but under my gentle guidance to be more effective
I do see the problem with this if you were wanting an anti-fighter screen on your escort ships in this case
3
General Discussion / Re: IR Autolance and Proximity Charge Launcher issues.
« on: May 15, 2023, 10:55:24 AM »@Dwarrfslayer
I can double check, but when I tested it a couple days ago auto fire without a target always chooses ships over fighters.
Okay so I can see what might be the difference in perception - because the Autolance avoids shields I am wading into a fighter screen of shielded carriers with lances zapping broadswords left and right - possibly you are getting behaviour with unshielded or shields-down ships and it's targeting a higher priority vessel?
I generally am using Autolances on an Executor just to mitigate fighter swarms, if a ship goes down shields in range it's dead usually so that would be a reason I don't see the lances focusing them for too long and they are free to zap fighter wings incoming
4
General Discussion / Re: IR Autolance and Proximity Charge Launcher issues.
« on: May 14, 2023, 09:02:09 AM »
As far as I can tell, the IR Autolance will swat fighters quite nicely but it only does so if you don't actually have a target selected so it can pick its own priority. If you target select then yes, it will completely ignore fighters.
It's a little awkward maybe, but it seems best to have it work this way so you can allow free fire, or focus fire on a shields-down target
It's a little awkward maybe, but it seems best to have it work this way so you can allow free fire, or focus fire on a shields-down target
5
Blog Posts / Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 2
« on: May 08, 2022, 10:15:06 AM »My suggestion for the Lion's Guard: Keep the base hulls as they are in the blog post. Then give them a high chance of having one-to-three s-mods, and allow those s-mods to stick around when the player captures them.
Hmm - interesting idea; I'll keep it in mind. I don't think it's really necessary or quite fits here, but I get what you're saying.
something not-quite the above, but along these lines would be great:
- a random s mod that may or may not be useful to you but comes with an increased severity version of special modifications
- or the penalty of 'special modifications' only comes into play (and scales upwards) when you put your own hull mods on the ships ["If my elite warships needed recovery shuttles they would have been BUILT with recovery shuttles."]
- or the effect of special modifications is positive(ish) but causes the cost of all other hull mods to increase, because it's incompatible with any flexible doctrine
6
General Discussion / Re: Sindrian Diktat Changes
« on: May 07, 2022, 12:48:16 PM »
I think the narrative justification is... passable. It can be understood why these ships have detriments (if you think pretty hard about it, not sure how much in-game evidence will explain further)
The problem I have is the 'feels-bad' factor of the cool designs being strictly worse - it just makes them hard to use. Not sure exactly on the interactions with D-mod skills, but this is something that to me feels like it shouldn't be counted as a typical D-mod. Those are generally damage/non functioning subsystems that will never be optimal, so you only have to worry about them being 'good enough'
Luddic Path ships are usually a bad idea due to their specific 'customizations' - but they can serve specific purposes and fit into a small niche with some creative builds and a bit of work. Some are better than others of course.
Comparatively it would eliminate some 'feels-bad' for the hot new LG skins if they were broadly a downgrade, but with a narrow upside that could possibly be exploited if circumstances are just right and some creative outfitting is used.
The problem I have is the 'feels-bad' factor of the cool designs being strictly worse - it just makes them hard to use. Not sure exactly on the interactions with D-mod skills, but this is something that to me feels like it shouldn't be counted as a typical D-mod. Those are generally damage/non functioning subsystems that will never be optimal, so you only have to worry about them being 'good enough'
Luddic Path ships are usually a bad idea due to their specific 'customizations' - but they can serve specific purposes and fit into a small niche with some creative builds and a bit of work. Some are better than others of course.
Comparatively it would eliminate some 'feels-bad' for the hot new LG skins if they were broadly a downgrade, but with a narrow upside that could possibly be exploited if circumstances are just right and some creative outfitting is used.
7
Suggestions / Re: Operating time limit halves battle gameplay experience
« on: June 13, 2017, 04:34:25 PM »
Being unable to retreat groups of ships (as far as I can tell) is a little annoying. Retreats really suck up the CP, I'd like to be able to select my 3 frigates and give them a group retreat order, rather than individually calling each ship captain and telling them to take a break before I can bring on my fresh replacements.
8
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: May 24, 2017, 01:38:25 PM »
- Fixed issue in refit screen where mounts on restored hulls would show "empty" hovertext after being fitted
Aha! Does this mean that using variants will stop stripping built-in weapon systems as well?
Looking good for the 0.8.1 !
9
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.8a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: April 22, 2017, 10:07:47 AM »every "in the heart of [xxxx]" mission ive had so far i found the target in the sun's corona
the solar shielding has value now me thinks ......
try inside the event horizon of a black hole, i agree the dangerous terrain missions add some depth for the terrain and solar shielding as well
10
General Discussion / Re: Fighter Rework and Missiles.
« on: October 09, 2016, 09:52:42 AM »
Has the idea of regeneration being limited to a single missile been considered? Once the racks are empty they're useless, so might as well load up another warhead.
If missiles can regenerate to 1 when completely depleted it still allows some advantage for conserving ammo, but prevents the ability to kite out all of the MIRVs from an astral for example, since it will eventually be able to fire another one off once it runs out.
For what it's worth I think missiles (some of them) have decent uses as they are, not perfect but fine to use in support of other weapons (isn't that the general idea?). Perhaps a way to give your fleet officers individual orders about how trigger-happy they are with ammo based weapons (like the old Strike Weapons Free fleet order)
If missiles can regenerate to 1 when completely depleted it still allows some advantage for conserving ammo, but prevents the ability to kite out all of the MIRVs from an astral for example, since it will eventually be able to fire another one off once it runs out.
For what it's worth I think missiles (some of them) have decent uses as they are, not perfect but fine to use in support of other weapons (isn't that the general idea?). Perhaps a way to give your fleet officers individual orders about how trigger-happy they are with ammo based weapons (like the old Strike Weapons Free fleet order)
11
General Discussion / Re: Impressions of the game after a three year absence.
« on: September 16, 2016, 03:36:13 PM »
I second the decision point on reinforcing enemies as well. Would it be possible to have a multi-stage encounter or perhaps a countdown to reinforcements so if you smash your original opponents fast enough you can scram before their big friends show up?
Honestly ship and weapon availability has never sat right with me since the inception of the campaign. Hulls and weapon types are common enough to encourage boring munchkin optimisation strategies, but not so common that any given ship can be acquired with a bit of dedication. The space-economy is driven by supplies and fuel, I'd like to see a shift to have it more driven by hulls and weapons, with supplies plentiful and fuel relatively cheap. Acquiring much-needed hardware from salvage so you can finish arming your rag-tag band sounds much more exciting to me than doing the space equivalent of fighting the fridge for your lunch of supplies and tasty space-gasoline
Honestly ship and weapon availability has never sat right with me since the inception of the campaign. Hulls and weapon types are common enough to encourage boring munchkin optimisation strategies, but not so common that any given ship can be acquired with a bit of dedication. The space-economy is driven by supplies and fuel, I'd like to see a shift to have it more driven by hulls and weapons, with supplies plentiful and fuel relatively cheap. Acquiring much-needed hardware from salvage so you can finish arming your rag-tag band sounds much more exciting to me than doing the space equivalent of fighting the fridge for your lunch of supplies and tasty space-gasoline
12
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Ships become cubes on taking damage
« on: September 12, 2016, 04:21:46 AM »
I encountered a similar problem, here's the thread you might find something in Alex's responses there
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10761
For me the problem fixed with a rollback and reinstall of my graphics driver
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10761
For me the problem fixed with a rollback and reinstall of my graphics driver
13
General Discussion / Re: 0.7.2 feedback
« on: March 12, 2016, 04:37:09 AM »
If the Afflictor was to be nerfed, I think the appropriate scale of the nerf would be something like not being able to fire for the duration of the disruption. This lets it support and gain advantage with its system shutting down shields, but prevents it alpha-ing massive warships into dust in a small window where they have no defence at all.
I've found phase ships to be very powerful, but not outrageous generally speaking. What phase ships do at the moment is greatly discourage small fleet play, in particular solo flagship play. You have to really have your *** together to handle any fleet with a phase ship on your own. With a few frigates or destroyers dedicated to escorting your important ships you shouldn't have serious trouble with any phase vessel and can generally focus down the enemy bruisers before cleaning up their phase ships.
The ion pulser can be a monstrous weapon in certain scenarios I really like the situational usefulness of the weapon, generally poor on a flagship but extremely potent on a support ship that can get in range and behind shields. A Harbinger with 3 pulsers and expanded magazines can and will disable any ship without 360 shields and good shield efficiency, the entropy amplifier even makes the pulsers do damage, 90 concentrated hits while amped will do real damage in addition to the EMP.
HIL and grav Sunder was my bread and butter in the midgame pirate bounty section of the campaign, the new high energy focus is very good in combination, overwhelms weak emitters easily and once shields go down the hurt really gets going 500dps HE is no joke.
I've found phase ships to be very powerful, but not outrageous generally speaking. What phase ships do at the moment is greatly discourage small fleet play, in particular solo flagship play. You have to really have your *** together to handle any fleet with a phase ship on your own. With a few frigates or destroyers dedicated to escorting your important ships you shouldn't have serious trouble with any phase vessel and can generally focus down the enemy bruisers before cleaning up their phase ships.
The ion pulser can be a monstrous weapon in certain scenarios I really like the situational usefulness of the weapon, generally poor on a flagship but extremely potent on a support ship that can get in range and behind shields. A Harbinger with 3 pulsers and expanded magazines can and will disable any ship without 360 shields and good shield efficiency, the entropy amplifier even makes the pulsers do damage, 90 concentrated hits while amped will do real damage in addition to the EMP.
HIL and grav Sunder was my bread and butter in the midgame pirate bounty section of the campaign, the new high energy focus is very good in combination, overwhelms weak emitters easily and once shields go down the hurt really gets going 500dps HE is no joke.
14
Bug Reports & Support / Re: [0.7.2aRC3] *Massive* rep drop after completing 1 marginally profitable delivery
« on: March 12, 2016, 03:52:52 AM »
I've seen this as well, delivering a large quantity of Organs to a TriTach market really hurt my hegemony peace plans.
Having said that, I'm not sure this is a bug per se. The rep loss is probably related to the volume of goods/the value of the goods shifted so a massive transfer for hundreds of thousands of credits would be a large drop. Perhaps it just seems alarmingly extreme to drop from "Friendly" to "Hostile" in a single market transaction.
Maybe limit the change to one or two drops in attitude level ie Cooperative to Friendly or Suspicious to Inhospitable.
Having said that, I'm not sure this is a bug per se. The rep loss is probably related to the volume of goods/the value of the goods shifted so a massive transfer for hundreds of thousands of credits would be a large drop. Perhaps it just seems alarmingly extreme to drop from "Friendly" to "Hostile" in a single market transaction.
Maybe limit the change to one or two drops in attitude level ie Cooperative to Friendly or Suspicious to Inhospitable.
15
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Damage texture bug
« on: March 02, 2016, 01:27:18 PM »
Aha! Drivers updated (to NVIDIA GeForce 341.92), all jre and settings.json reverted to the download default. Everything working as intended 
Thanks for help
Thanks for help
Pages: [1] 2