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

Suggestions / Re: Mk.1 vs. Automated Onslaught Restoration

« on: April 25, 2025, 04:09:15 PM »

The Mk1 is genuinely unsophisticated, being a primitive ship dating into what is now prehistory.   The Sentinel ships on the other hand are using AI-control technologies that have literally been purged from the sector.  I think it hangs together.

2

Suggestions / Re: abyss looks cheap

« on: April 24, 2025, 09:56:07 AM »

The pitch black is great for occasional visits. However, if you spend too much time in the Abyss, it does get dull.

  I would suggest the deep abyss ( like 4-5 map cells in?) gets a subtle, ghostly backdrop.

3

General Discussion / Re: Kinetic Fragments

« on: April 24, 2025, 09:06:20 AM »

They're nice on paper, but they have trouble connecting in small numbers.

4

General Discussion / Re: Carrier Skills and Diminishing Returns

« on: April 23, 2025, 03:10:16 PM »

The problem with OP cost is that the direct OP cost of fighters is not proportionately scaled to their effectiveness.  That's because much of the OP cost of fighters is baked in to the carrier directly.  Fighters range from 0-20 OP cost and that scaling simply doesn't work well for use as a cap.  If you put the soft cap at 80 OP, that's 4 wings of Tridents... or *80* wings of Talons.  Neither number is where you want a softcap to be. There's too much variability.

The best you could do would be a hybrid scaling where part of it scales off # of wings and part of it scales off OP cost.  It would be difficult to make the scaling both simple to understand and to actually work for its purpose.  Alternatively, you could add OP back to carriers and jack up the price of all fighters.  However, that would be massively more disruptive to builds and to balance than making DP changes.

5

Suggestions / Re: buff industrial planning skill

« on: April 23, 2025, 02:08:19 PM »

I mean, we used to have more colony skills that did stuff like that. But their fire has gone out of the universe, and IP is all that's left.   They were kind of problematic design wise.

I don't think it's really *intentional* that administrators are either chumps or guys with the one possible skill, it's just, where we are atm.

6

Suggestions / Re: Change Gemini AI

« on: April 23, 2025, 02:06:36 PM »

Ideally it would show up under the Carrier tag in the codex, regardless of AI.

7

Suggestions / Re: Suggestion: Move the Monitor from the League to the Sindrian Diktat

« on: April 23, 2025, 01:23:44 PM »

The monitor's designed for convoy defense, which makes sense for a trade league.  Unfortunately convoy defense isn't a real thing in the game.

8

Suggestions / Re: Save loadout & export/import loadouts

« on: April 23, 2025, 01:59:38 AM »

I'm a little confused.  Fitting doesn't go much faster than using an already-saved loadout. Theoretically you could save like.... a few clicks... if autofits could be shift selected. But that's it. Hardly seems worth it.

9

General Discussion / Re: Anti Core World Fleet

« on: April 22, 2025, 10:52:05 PM »

Paragons are great and all, but having it be effectively your whole frontline won't give you a lot of flexibility. Just one won't really lock down things enough.  I'd swap out the Astral for idk, 2x Anubis?  Some Tempests?  Tie them to the Paragon and they can watch its back.

10

Lore, Fan Media & Fiction / Re: Where did all the ships come from?

« on: April 22, 2025, 10:44:28 PM »

Yeah, it's Domain Navy for the most part. Some of the High Tech ships are purely corporate, like the Odyssey and the Apogee.  And some have been developed by TriTach post collapse.

I've always been kinda unclear why 14th battlegroup was lowtech (excepting the Eagles and Falcons).  They had to have been at minimum hundreds of years behind the times, and it's not like it was hard for the Domain to make new ships.  It makes sense for the *Hegemony* to be low tech; I'd believe that they just don't have the blueprints or knowledge to maintain the high end stuff, especially after the AI Wars.  But the lowtech XIV ships feel anomalous.

It's notable that the Hegemony is even supposed to have a few Astrals, lore-wise, although ingame I think they haven't had them since the Legion was added.

11

Suggestions / Re: ship_unique_signature

« on: April 22, 2025, 10:31:18 PM »

It's logical that these ships would be too distinctive, but yeah, its worth having it noted.

I was writing up thoughts about a 'Famous' hullmod earlier. Besides specifically noting to the player that its a well known ship, it could also have an effect like making unlikely to be permanently lost (i.e. will turn into a derelict even if you get wiped.) That could get complicated with like the Abyss, but a little safety net for Ironman'd be nice.

Might also open up a design space for other unique ships. Finding the ISS Black Star (the OG merc Hammerhead from the missions screen)?  Fun stuff like a unique LP Onslaught, or an old Wolf flagship of Kanta's long thought lost?

12

General Discussion / Re: Why is the Gemini a warship?

« on: April 22, 2025, 10:24:25 PM »

well compared to a condor or drover its basically a battlecarrier

but the legion is officially flagged as a carrier so :shrug:

13

General Discussion / Re: Luddic Majority not economically viable

« on: April 22, 2025, 06:19:59 PM »

Look, not all of us wanna be drug dealers.

14

Suggestions / Re: Significantly reduce cost of surveying gas giants

« on: April 22, 2025, 04:52:02 PM »

Re: OP your logic seems sound. Does seem like a lava planet or irradiated world would be the hardest to survey rather than gas giants.  Maybe you need to fabricate a lot of probes to analyze weather patterns and sample different layers of the atmosphere?

But as people have said there's not much point while you can just slap survey sensors on your logistics.  Isn't this why we had a logistics mod cap...?

15

General Discussion / Re: Carrier Skills and Diminishing Returns

« on: April 22, 2025, 03:35:59 PM »

What really sucks is that a Mining Pod or Talon squadron penalizes the bonus as much as a Trident does.  Some ships are just worse in bigger fleets because they have built ins or struggle to afford more expensive fighters (i.e. Condor, Shepherd, Venture, Colossus MK III.)

Doesn't help that there's only 5 fighter-related hullmods and two of them (converted fighter bay and recovery shuttles) are probably the worst mods in the game. And Converted Hangar costs you DP and you probably can't afford quality fighters in those either so I've stopped using it entirely.

I was throwing around ideas with a friend earlier of making fighters cost DP again, dropping the DP cost of carriers accordingly, and having the fighter bonuses scale with DP spent. This would unify mechanics with Converted Hangar and potentially allow some new ones like limiting some Hangars to X DP cost.  Sure, you could presumably bring 24 hangars of Talons with full bonus but is that really a problem?