Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hyperspace Topography (10/12/22)

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 - Igncom1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 98
1
General Discussion / Re: Why do fighters in the setting still use pilots?
« on: November 30, 2022, 10:53:03 PM »
Oh yea? What about DRONE DRONES? Ever think of that?!

2
General Discussion / Re: Why do fighters in the setting still use pilots?
« on: November 30, 2022, 11:08:52 AM »
One thing with fighter drones, is why not frigate drones?

Well for one thing automation seems to be on a ship per ship basis. Some have very little, some might not actually need the crews they state and have them merely as a cover for systems that pretend to follow your commands...

Personally I like a little skin in the game, even if that skin is wrapped in adamantium and my mind is more of an electronic cloud dancing through hyperspace. I'm still there dammit!

3
General Discussion / Re: Why do fighters in the setting still use pilots?
« on: November 21, 2022, 08:46:51 AM »
AIs capable of piloting fightercraft are illegal

Wasp tho

More of a drone. Like a program vs an AI which is more like a person.

4
General Discussion / Re: Why do fighters in the setting still use pilots?
« on: November 21, 2022, 06:56:29 AM »
I suppose for the same reasons why all real life aircraft haven't been replaced by drones. The tech just isn't always there, but people sure are.

And the last time someone tried to use fleets of automated fighters and spaceships, they fought 2 maybe 3 wars over the topic. So old classics will have to do.

5
I've been playing with a luddic fleet, and low tech ships do just fine with converted hangers, not like they are actually much better/worse with cheaper guns, saves putting fighters and interceptors in the carriers. High tech ships however often need all the points they can get for vents and weapons.

It's expensive when compared to carriers, but a swarm of bees is a swarm of bees. Every Enforcer helps.

6
General Discussion / Re: What is your prefered piloted ship type?
« on: November 15, 2022, 11:28:52 AM »
I like lists built around a solid core of battleships or carriers. Supported by a variety of smaller assets like cruisers or destroyers.

But you can only really support that later in the game, for much of the middle game I mostly rely on a couple cruisers supported by destroyers and frigates for surveying/combat expeditions.

7
General Discussion / Re: No autosave? Seriously?
« on: November 11, 2022, 01:35:57 PM »
Saving is just TT downloading a copy of your data across the internet, like any true intrusive corporation.

8
General Discussion / Re: No autosave? Seriously?
« on: November 08, 2022, 10:45:31 AM »
An in development game for how many years now?

9
General Discussion / Re: Cruiser-class ship with a built-in fighter bay
« on: October 20, 2022, 11:41:40 PM »
Yeah I'm team Wasp. Even if just for vaporising enemies with their proxy bombs.

6 free PD lasers are pretty good.

10
General Discussion / Re: Cruiser-class ship with a built-in fighter bay
« on: October 20, 2022, 10:57:40 AM »
Isn't there, like, 6 or 7? If you also include the poxy bomber.

Or if you mean strictly fighter craft drones at which point I think there is only the one remnant one yes.

11
General Discussion / Re: No autosave? Seriously?
« on: October 05, 2022, 10:56:19 PM »
and b) who cares?

I do.

It's ludicrous that the game lacks this basic functionality, and the people arguing against it are little more then contrarians who don't what the game to change.

"Lol you want to automate the game saving every half an hour?"

Yes, I'm busy having fun. Or was until my game ended and now I have to go back 3 hours. Might as well stop playing that that point.

Calling people lazy or entitled for wanting their programs to have basic functions is pure spite and easy to ignore the people who say it. Good for you mate you don't need an autosave, push on.

12
General Discussion / Re: No autosave? Seriously?
« on: October 04, 2022, 10:57:24 AM »
I 100% support the idea of an auto-save feature, let people turn it off it they really want to.

But the mere concept that a basic functionality of a game, that is common even in Microsoft Word and Excel these days, doesn't need to be there is totally absurd.

I shouldn't need a mod to remind me to manually save, that shouldn't need to exist at all.

13
General Discussion / Re: anyone else despise the buoy mechanics?
« on: October 03, 2022, 10:57:05 AM »
I like the buoys.

But what would be the alternative? A king of the hill objective like a below the map asteroid base to control? As it is there isn't much to fight over in literal empty space so I'm sure we can contrive something to fight near beyond every space battle being a pursuit.

Perhaps a targeting array that gives whomever holds it for a couple minutes without interdiction a range boost? (bigger then the ECM current one) So if you don't contest it, you can get sniped? People might not like that sort of thing as anybody likes being able to win against the odds when facing an entire armada.

Of course split the objective up and you are back where you started.

Some battles don't even have the buoys and frankly they aren't much different to me. The frigates do less frig on frig duels off the sides of the battle line and a little more harassment on the fringes. Buoys add terrain to an otherwise bland empty battlemap. People hate meteorite showers, and entropy ridden black holes are actually aweful to fight in.

So what could an on map objective add that people wouldn't hate? If not deployment points, then what? We already have weapon range and speed. A CR timer boost? A salvage boost?

14
General Discussion / Re: In 95.1a, can low tech be implemented?
« on: September 28, 2022, 05:54:56 AM »
low tech has never been bad. They've just not been hightech or midline or prates and so on.

Onslaughts have always been good, calling them memeslaughts is just a coping mechanism.

15
General Discussion / Re: dominator vs eagle 1v1
« on: September 24, 2022, 10:24:14 AM »
I mean even a hound can beat a dominator if it can flank it.

Speed and manoeuvrability is very strong in star sector and some ships are more vulnerable then others to it's effects.

Dominators do extremely well when their flanks are protected, but can be easily hard countered by anything with an anti-armour weapon if flanked.

I mean there is even a scenario battle that has a couple high tech ships killing a battleship on their own, which is possible because of low techs general weaknesses.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 98