Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

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 - pairedeciseaux

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: May 15, 2023, 02:51:43 PM »
Conquest also a great platform for Hephaestus, paired with Mark IX on each side.

General Discussion / Re: Random comments on 0.96a
« on: May 15, 2023, 02:46:51 PM »
Nova:  Seems like a high-tech Retribution, and just as weird or awkward to use, although I will not pilot it because I will not get Tech 8 to unlock it.  Seems like it is built to drive in, alpha strike, back out, and repeat.  Loadout I used was two plasma cannons, three graviton beams, one ion beam, some burst PD, and empty missiles (due to lack of OP and Breach Pods at hand).  Have not put it through real battle yet.

I use a build lighter on flux than yours, allowing sustained fire. Backing out only necessary when in trouble.
  • 1 Plasma Cannon
  • 2 Kinetic Blasters
  • 1 Ion Pulser (on right-side large hard point)
  • 2 Ion Cannons (on left-side medium hard points)
  • 4 IR Pulse Lasers (on turrets, together with S-mod IPDAI)
  • Sabots
  • S-Mod Extended Shields

Basically it feels like an Aurora on steroid. :D Although, one pays a heavy OP price for Neural Interface, not to mention so much skill points spent in technology.

For what it's worth, here is the Executor build I'm using:
  • Capacitors: 13
  • Vents: 55
  • Integrated Targeting Unit (S)
  • Reinforced Bulkheads (S)
  • Auxiliary Thrusters
  • Integrated Point Defense AI
  • Neural Interface
  • 3 Heavy Autocannons
  • 1 Dual Flak Cannon in the front
  • 1 Heavy Needler in the front
  • 1 Dual Flak Cannon in the back
  • 2 Heavy Burst Lasers
  • 1 Ion Beam
  • 1 Graviton Beam
  • 2 Tachyon Lances
  • 4 PD Lasers
  • 1 Locust SRM Launcher
  • 1 Hurricane MIRV Launcher

Flux stats are modest compared to the one posted be Amoebka: 17720 capacity and 1090 dissipation.

As-is I mostly use it as an AI-controlled ship while I control a Nova using Neural Link skill.

Before using Neural Interface, Executor had Hardened Shield and was main player-controlled ship. (Also it used to have 2x Locust.) In this context, tactic was simple when facing a shielded opponent:
  • Get into kinetic gun range
  • Raise opponent hard flux
  • Engage High Energy Focus and fire Tachyon Lances
  • (maybe use Hurricane)

Against frigates and unprotected destroyers, skip steps 1 and 2, because step 3 is usually a one-shot kill.

I think Tachyon Lance and High Energy Focus have a good synergy, especially together with sustained + flux efficient kinetic pressure ... all in a relatively fast capital ship.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: May 05, 2023, 03:47:04 PM »
Same observation as FooF:

I love the new in-system ambient music.

The sector feels more hostile with all those threatening scavenger fleets. Though those proved to be good logistic ship source after defeating two in the same system.  :D

I do have a minor complain: the planet displayed when surveying can have a large / bright / in your face purple corona-something-something (that's probably the way planet's magnetic field is displayed), it is too much in my opinion. Could be more subtle with, say, reduced opacity or a darker tone.

Thank you for the new version.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: February 03, 2023, 04:05:47 PM »
More hammers? Hammer time!

Looking forward to play with all of this.

Regarding the Fury tangent discussion,

Sabot-based build for my AI-controlled Fury, in current campaign:

1 Heavy Blaster
2 Sabot SRP Pods
4 PD Lasers
1 Mining Laser
(one small energy slot empty)

Pick hullmods among:

Expanded Missile Racks
Integrated Targeting Unit
Reinforce Bulkheads
Shield Conversion - Front

When you build in the first 3 hullmods (EMR + ITU + RB are worth 50 OP) and pay 10 OP for the last one you can do:

30 Capacitors
30 Vents

Depending on officer, you obtain a cruiser-sized brawler providing great to amazing performance. Even officer-less, Fury is a solid choice. I mean... fairly high speed, sustained fire with Heavy Blaster, good shield, kinetic burst with Sabots.

In the past, I have also used Fury without missile (or with a lower amount than in the build above) and was satisfied. Ion Pulser and IR Pulser Lasers are useful here.

I do like the suggestion to add some OP: improved incentive to fill all weapon slots. But truth be told, top priority on this ship is to spend OP on flux stats to support blaster and shield, the rest is icing on the cake.

Also, change the medium missile hardpoint into a synergy one? Like the existing right-side medium turret. It would provide more flexibility for those who want to build a missile-less Fury, like we can on Aurora. Although, sure, medium missile hardpoint might be a defining trait common with Shrike that needs so stay.

You can't touch this.

Suggestions / Re: Buff the Medium Energy Slot
« on: January 08, 2023, 02:14:36 PM »
I do have extensive play time of current Hyperion with 1 or 2 Mining Blasters.

Only on player-controlled ship, MB manually fired, never shooting into shield, aiming (if possible in the heat of battle) engines and high priority weapons of enemy ships.

So I like it. Doesn't mean it's "the best", though.  ;D

Idea 1: increase its damage from 700 to 900, and reduce its fire rate from 30 shots/min to 20 shots/min. So a DPS decrease (from 350 to 300), but more importantly have an even more obvious "burst" behaviour. Don't ask me about flux per shot.

Idea 2: keep its damage and fire rate as is, but add a guaranteed on-hit secondary effect. Like damage a wider part of the armor, do higher damage to bare hull/engines/weapons.

Suggestions / Re: Suggestion for top tier derelict/scavenged ships
« on: February 28, 2022, 03:42:32 PM »
Hello, I like the general idea that some repairs could only be done using appropriate material.

Thinking about a different approach:
  • Integrate that with D-mods (both existing and new ones) and story points
  • D-mods are more or less crippling
  • Damaged parts can be replaced, thus removing the corresponding D-mod, in fact UI only displays the D-mod and allows its removal when at least 1 unit of appropriate part is in cargo or storage (damaged parts have no real existence)
  • When hovering over the D-mod in refit screen, UI tells which part would allow to fix it
  • Replacement parts can be obtained when a ship is salvaged/scuttled provided said part is not damaged on host ship
  • Replacement parts can only by installed at colonies with spaceport or orbital station
  • Installing a replacement part cost 1 story point and consume 1 unit of the part
  • It's not longer possible to fully restore a ship with just money or player character skills, now player needs both parts and story points

So, Legion propulsion system is a good candidate. What about Paragon shield generator, Onslaught TPC or special armor plating?

As an alternative or complement to ship-class-specific parts, having generic replacement parts that could be used on any ship could also be interesting. Such parts that allow would removing Unreliable Subsystems, Faulty Power Grid, and so on. Though I realise this is quite far from the intent of the original post above.

Now the annoying bits: how often do replacement parts drop? Guaranteed? Is it possible to sell replacement parts? What do they look like?

General Discussion / Re: Is there a lore reason for no XIV Mora?
« on: February 25, 2022, 01:10:53 PM »
A must-read:


So why are these in the field? The Domain navy decommissioned them from military service, so they were de-militarized and sold to budget-minded civilian enterprises in development on the Domain’s frontier, as having some former carriers with big handling/construction bays can be a very useful thing. Once the Collapse comes around, these former construction/mine drone handlers slash ersatz mobile drydocks are re-militarized (thus less useful out-of-combat stats than one might expect). Used perhaps more by pirates, independents, and the Luddic Church more than by the Hegemony or TriTachyon, so that the big carrier fleets of these guys can be supported by something better than Condors but not so good as the Heron or Gemini.


Summary:  I wanted to like Neural link on it's own, but the skill is clearly a late addition to the game, and doesn't neatly fit into the overall game experience.  There are a host of minor but annoying interactions that keep it from being good, on top of what seems like penalities this skill has that no other skill does, presumably to keep it in check.  Overall, trying to use it in campaign actually feels like it makes the fleet weaker, as opposed to even simply doing no net harm and merely being a skill pick opportunity cost.

I haven't yet played with Neural Link, so can't share hands-on experience. Ability to quickly switch from one ship to another sounds great to create and "multiply" the effects of tactical opportunities.

My understanding is it's more like an extension of the old "lone hero ship" paradigm, where player's flagship is the star of the show and does all/most of the work. With Neural Link player does not "solo" ennemy fleet, player has a pair of ships that both benefit from most of his player skills.

So I guess in order to make the most out of Neural Link, with a min-maxer mindset, one should use a lot of skills among red/combat skills (in addition to Gunnery Implants, Energy Weapon Mastery, Ordnance Expertise and Polarized Armor). This is something I would like to do in a future run, though it would then mean I won't go the Hull Restoration route this time, ha!

Note: uhh, I need to check, but I think Missile Specialisation's ammo bonus is not shared with neural linked ship.

Side note: This was also my first run in 0.95.1a using Medusas, and realizing they may have been power crept by their nearest competitors.  I feel like 360 degree shield capable ships used to be speical back in the day, but now we've got Shrikes, Scarabs, Hyperions, Furies, Auroras, and Odysseys which are all fast with manueverability systems and can get 360 degree shields.  Omens, Apogees, Astrals, and Paragons naturally have 360 degree shields.  The only things in the high tech lineup that can't are Wolves, Tempests, and Medusa.  I wonder if the Tempests and Medusa might be due for a shield arc increase, especially now that AI controlled Tempests can throw away their PD.  Medusas do drop their shields when they skim, so I probably wouldn't go with a front shield on AI Medusas, but would it hurt to bump the Medusa's shield arc from 120 to 150 to match the rest of the line up these days?

Power creep indeed.   ;D

Hmmm, let me check my current ~240 DP fleet composition where player character is at level 14...

1 officered Tempest with an empty missile slot and: Heavy Armor (S), Reinforced Bulkheads (S), Flux Distributor, Accelerated Shields, Extended Shields, Stabilized Shields

1 flagship Medusa with 2 small energy slots left empty and: Heavy Armor (S), Reinforced Bulkheads (S), Extended Shields - though since I usually switch to Conquest when deploying fleet for those large 300K+ bounty battles, this Medusa is effectively a non-officered AI ship

2 Wolves with 1 small energy slot left empty and: Reinforced Bulkheads, Flux Distributor, Flux Coil Adjunct

... and they are all doing really well (with a fair amount of OP budget spent on defensive hullmods)! Yes, Medusa benefits greatly from Extended Shields as it allows it to stay longer on target while being lightly pressured on one side. I guess one could say the same for Wolf and Tempest, but since they are so small and mobile, they are not that endangered until quite late in a campaign.

Another way to boost Medusa would be to give it a bit more OP rather that just improving its shield.

(note: this is a "Support Doctrine run", so I deploy around 18 ships and generally have numerical superiority, I think this plays a significant role in one's assessment of shield arc requirements for high tech ships)

Suggestions / Re: More broadside ships?
« on: January 11, 2022, 03:03:29 PM »
I agree more broadside ships would be welcome. I think adding one compelling destroyer-sized ship that would support symmetric builds could serve as incentive for player to learn/practice this "strange" battle gameplay style.

Today broadside is not super popular because: controls are harder, piloting skills requirements are higher, also situation awareness is very important. Those issues are probably not going to disappear, but having incentive to try broadsiding could be higher with additional ships that you can only use this way.

Having said that,

  • Shrike is a decent aggressive broadside ship (left side, like Odyssey) especially the pirate version with a kinetic gun
  • Centurion can kind of broadside (3 sides: left, front, right) using its main guns
  • Onslaught too (3.2 sides: left, front, right, rear count as 0.2  ;D ) - in theory general purpose broadside builds are easier to design with 0.95.1 (small ballistic + hullmod) but I have not tried it, and focusing on front facing firepower is so tempting anyway
  • Fury can also broadside (mainly right side when using a medium energy gun in the right-side mount) - AI does that sometimes
Modded: havent played this since a long time, but in case you don't know it, Outer Rim Alliance (often abbreviated ORA) is a fantastic mod - balanced high tech broadside ships dream come true. Looks like it has not been updated for 0.95.1, I'd suggest to keep an eye on it.

Regarding your broadside concept with armor pieces and weapon hard mounts, I could see this idea being used for drone ships / domain-era survey ships.

I have an Eradicator in storage with the following build:
  • Missiles: 5 Annihilator Rocket Launchers
  • Medium ballistics from left to right: 1 Heavy Autocannon, 1 Heavy Mortar, 1 Heavy Autocannon
  • Small ballistics from rear to front: 2 Vulcan Cannons, 2 Light Dual Machine Guns, 1 Light Assault Gun, 1 Light Dual Machine Gun, 1 Vulcan Cannon
  • Hullmods: Integrated Targeting Unit, Reinforced Bulkheads
  • (probably 30 vents and 11 capacitors)

It was used in a light&fast fleet composition before transitioning to the full 240 DP fleet with heavier cruisers.

You really want missiles on your Eradicators.  ;D  If you prefer a cheap option OP-wise, I recommend 5x dual Hammers. This is a good compromise between punch, ammo and OP cost.

A good hullmod for an Eradicator properly build with missiles is - obviously - Expanded Missile Racks, especially when built-in with a story point.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: December 24, 2021, 03:27:16 AM »
After playing 0.95.1 RC3/RC4 for a while, I wrote a few notes below. This is a great release accoss the board.
  • Bounty difficulty: felt a spike around 150-200K where I basically switched to delivery missions and then went exploring because bounty hunting became impossible, on the other hand later 300K seemed more manageable (less capitals and less officers when compaired to 0.95?).
  • Twice during this playthrough, at the start of a battle my flagship spawned on top of an asteroid. This is a bit annoying. Personnaly I consider this as a bug.
  • Didn't find Hyperion in any shop.
  • Officer level up seemed a bit slow, this seems to be addressed in RC6 but I haven't played that version yet.
  • Rushed to get Hull Restoration skill ASAP. Quickly removed all D-mods. Also only got new D-mods once for own disabled ships during battle, for the whole duration of this play-through. Am a bit surprised how effective this is, I guess top tier skills ought to be powerful like this.
  • Intel/planets screen usability: I would like the "planet list state" to be remembered by the game. Because when I go back and forth between intel screen and map screen, I have to choose again and again the appropriate sort and scroll to the position I was before.
  • On the sector map, when the player fleet is in hyperspace, the rectangle corners showing fleet position are not visible enough.
  • I really feel like having a skilled colony administrator early is a player trap. Got 2 while exploring, turned down the first one because no colony yet, then kept the second one. I knew it but kept it and payed a lot of money thinking it would eventually be usefull, but it probably still isn't at the point I am now (two level 4 colonies, two level 3).

Fleet currently contains ships ranging from 5 DP to 30 DP, almost all with good mobility. For a while the strongest were a pair of Auroras, until I added a Prometheus Mk2 - first time I use that one! With S-modded Militarized Subsystems in order to keep high burn speed. Also it is my only tanker. 1 player-controlled ship, 10 officer-controlled ships, 6 no-officer ships:
  • 1 capital: Prometheus Mk2
  • 5 cruisers: 2 Auroras, 1 Fury, 2 Pirate Eradicactors
  • 6 destroyers: 1 Pirate Manticore, 1 Pirate Enforcer, 2 Hammerheads, 1 Pirate Shrike, 1 Drover
  • 5 frigates: 1 Afflictor, 2 Tempests, 2 Wolves
  • (1 logistic ship: Atlas)

(All ships 250, Combat ships 240, Fighter bays 6)

General Discussion / Re: Ships that could use a slight OP boost
« on: December 21, 2021, 03:06:57 PM »
Regarding Fury,

I have had good success with a Pirate Shrike and a Fury in 0.95.1-RC4, both AI-controlled. Fury do not feel OP-starved, and still feels like a bargain at 20 DP, IMO. I would have set it at 22 DP, but now that Eagle got buffed, we'll see how they both fare.

What do you need additional OP for on Fury? Would you please share your OP-starved Fury loadouts?

Below are loadouts I currently use. Earlier this year, with 0.95, I also have successfully used AI-controlled Fury with 2 Sabot Pods + ITU + EMR (only 2 S-mods IIRC).

Pirate Shrike:



Do you think Fury is closer to... 8 DP (Pirate) Shrike or 30 DP Aurora? Screenshots in spoiler above speak for themselves. Yes, I know, different officer skills and personalities, 3 S-mods in Fury and Aurora while none in Pirate Shrike. Also player character is level 15 with 6 points spent in leadership, 4 points spent in technology and 5 points spent in industry.

At the end of the day, Fury is the best platform for the best weapon in the game: Heavy Blaster.  :P

Suggestions / Re: Add gates overlay to general sector map
« on: December 20, 2021, 01:15:40 PM »
Yes, makes senses: map is used to travel, gates are used to travel, gates should be on the map.

I would really love to see a global solution as suggested by Wyvern. For bounty hunting, here is what I do: open intel screen, click on various bounties to see details, right click on the system where the target fleet is likely hiding, open map screen, view system map of the system where the target fleet is likely hiding (if system was already explored), check whether appropriate planets are there as described in bounty details, if yes then right click on such a planet. And sometimes back and forth between intel screen and map screens (global/system) is required. The switch to from intel screen to map screen is annoying and seem unnecessary.

Over the years, some improvements have been made to both intel screen and map screen, but some additional usability improvement would be welcome. I've written in the past that they should be merged. Other suggestions:


Suggestions / Re: Odyssey Medium Synergy Mount
« on: December 17, 2021, 11:28:49 AM »
Or Ion Pulser on medium synergy + Autopulse Laser on large energy + Expanded Magazines.

(this is very much viable on Radiant now, and combines well with other Large Energy guns)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 23