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: More and useful info before and after battles so the player can learn the game

« on: September 20, 2023, 07:47:26 PM »

At some point you should really consider exploring your refit options, optimized loadout gives an edge. And officers are essential for fleet performance, if you want easier battles definitely make hiring full roster a high priority.

Officiers certainly are extremely powerful, although not essential for most of the game thanks to the lovely support doctrine perk for fleets on a budget (really helps building-up faster if you play without commission/colony/market-cheese).
This of course goes with your argument of manual refitting, which is the most important part of fleet composition.

To answer the original comment, ships that lose mirror fights mean they lose the flux war, the main factors being the raw dissipation/capacitors, flux-usage and efficiency (how much you inflict for what you spent firing), how much the AI can afford to vent/armour-tank, and range
Honestly, with officiers like yours, just get support doctrine, it's a level 3 officier on every ship for free.

Eagles are a pain to build correctly so there's a very likely build-issue, you can see every AI build in the codex(pause) or refit-screen, they're mostly meh. You rarely should need to prepare on a per-build basis, although i get why you'd want to know what skills the officiers are hiding.

For this case, i don't see anything fighter/missile related, and i bet those eagles are rocking sabots and so should you, they're the joker card of flux-fights.
A common mistake is using every weapon mount and non-essential hullmods. Also that an Eagle can somehow armour-tank your ships means you don't have anything heavy-hitting, get something with high per-hit damage to crack-open those (or missiles but AI eagles love pd).
Strip your Eagles (and the others) of any weapon/system that isn't meant end into another ship, dump everything you can into flux (shields included) to support proper ballistics (medium energy aren't real weapons, just graviton/ion those), only use front-facing slots, and even an unofficered ship should win through virtue of singular focus.

Then it just comes down to never letting your frigates stray into their demise like deer on the highway and gang-up the enemy cruisers the moment they're the only thing left. Eagles can easily chase and pop isolated/over-committing(aka existing within a km) frigates, so do not hesitate to issue (normal)retreat orders the moment one steps forward, as waypoint/escort orders are often only suggestions to the AI.

2

Suggestions / Re: The currant character sheet discourages and nerfs players flying their own ship.

« on: September 19, 2023, 07:52:38 AM »

You can argue that character skillsheets are all about tradeoffs and having varied playstyle, choices and power variables, and that's great when it's fun, but being weaker or cutting out flying entirely and missing that whole amazing gameplay experience is a bad outcome, very bad.

This comes up every so often. I think your observations are pretty much spot-on, but not the conclusions. The fleet skill points and personal flagship skill points are mixed in together in the same skill point pool so that the player has maximum flexibility in deciding where to allocate those points. If the player likes playing the game more like an arcade, then more points go into flagship skills. If the player likes playing the game more like an admiral, then more points go into fleet skills. This also changes throughout a playthrough; initially, I tend to take more flagship skills, but as my fleet gets bigger, I'll respec into more fleet skills, even though I'll generally always have between 4 and 7 points into flagship skills.

The whole point is that you can choose to go along many different paths, but you can only choose one at a time (or, technically, you can get up to 3 capstones, so that'd be up to 3 at a time). You can choose to be a fighter, or a cleric, or a mage, or a rogue, and play the game through that way, but you can't be a fighter/cleric/mage/rogue/artificer/bard/ranger/etc. all at once, which would make the player too overpowered and the game too easy. Each path needs to have something good, but also make you give up something good as well, so you can't do it all at any given time. That's how a lot of game balance works. If this game allowed you to do everything, i.e. say give you 40 skill points instead of 15, then a lot of the skills would have to be severely nerfed so that the game doesn't become too easy.

For a sufficiently skilled player, the flagship can generally do around 2x to 3x as much as the AI in that same ship. So the player's flagship is the single most influential ship in your fleet. That's why it may make more sense to put points into flagship skills rather than fleet skills.

It looks like your fleet is specializing in Best of the Best, Support Doctrine, and Hull Restoration. SD and HR are solid picks for the early game, but as you acquire and level up more officers, SD becomes less useful, and as your fleet gets more powerful and have less deaths, HR also becomes less useful. At that point it'll be worth respec'ing away from those skills and put your points elsewhere, such as flagship skills or other fleet skills, which will give you more points to put into the stuff you want.

This isn't a "pick your class" issue at all, this is a "do you want to play a fighting game or an RTS" situation.
I always choose the later, because i'm not good enough for the former which means i don't invest in it as it would be a waste, therefore not flying myself because i'll always be outmatched, and so on and so on.

Put simply, personal and fleetwide/campaign skills should be entirely separate, don't care if it's nerfed/fragmented too, but as with the previous skill system, the issue stays the same.
Even those who would like to play with only personal skills can't, as you'll be obligated to pick unrelated ones before the two in green/blue/yellow sections.

It's either Player&backgroundunits or Units-TheGame with the player on a harmless 2dp kite because a skill-less character is actively harmful with support doctrine.
Thanks to Consolecommands, i decided to give myself a second skill point every two levels, that way at max level i have 7 combat skill that only affect the ship i actually get to pilot, although the existence of CommandCenter means some tradeoff still exists.

3

Suggestions / Re: Finisher missiles and unshielded targets

« on: September 14, 2023, 08:55:25 PM »

I've lost count of the amount of times my starting Venture got bullied by a hound/cerberus through a staunch refusal to fire harpoons, only to then unload every sabot when low hp and blowing it up through sheer mass.
I've noticed the same behaviour with explosive weaponry in general, as it also refuses to fire heavy mortars on unshielded even at 0 flux, the only way i got it to work on other ships is to link explosive+kinetic, but the weapon placement on Venture doesn't allow that trick.

I understand why it's there (for the missiles at least), insta-popping crappy pirates/derelicts frigates as they approach is funny, but you might look like an idiot with nothing to crack-open that tougher nut further up.

4

Suggestions / Re: Bounty collected by third party should not cause reputation penalty

« on: September 11, 2023, 02:23:37 AM »

The 'kill this Orbital Station/Battlestation/Star Fortress' mission is a (rare) vanilla bounty.

Anyway yeah, getting your bounty KS'd should be made to never cause a rep drop.
Although arguably patrols randomly deciding to whack orbital stations can be an issue in itself, in that since they can do it so easily why do those in-system pirate bases still exist?

From what i understand, there is a major dissonance between lore and gameplay. Supposedly the major factions are too busy staring each other in the blank of the eyes to bother cleaning-up some dudes holed-up in a station or rock in the same system, as ships are far more valuable than presented in gameplay.

The mission/challenges are apparently lore-accurate, as in armadas being one capital&co, which are deemed so valuable that destroying one can cripple war efforts. I was also intrigued by the fact that the main story made such a fanfare out of the christening of a "mere" Eagle (by player standards) by the High Hegemon himself.

Alex also discussed about the ideas of reducing ingame fleet sizes in https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=27859.0
Edit: That you are the author of, haha^^

5

General Discussion / Re: Hypershunt Taps

« on: September 10, 2023, 01:56:38 AM »

You can't even get them functioning with the core. Any trade disruption immediately sends you into -5 stability and huge negatives, and they happen often enough to completely offset the benefits an extra industry would bring.

Third most worthless item in the game, up there with drone replicator and cryoarithmetic engine.

At least the replicator can be put temporarily on colonies you're not certain you can defend in orbit when you've been cheeky and colonised early.
Cryoarithmetic would be much useful if defence fleets actually mattered for hostile activity, better than nothing for hot habitables i guess (if you don't care about the Path).

6

Suggestions / Re: Solutions to Pather-Pirate incoherency

« on: September 02, 2023, 11:00:51 AM »

I've seen some interesting ideas there, i'm in the camp of corrupt Path and fanatical pirates (basically Orks) being nonsensical.

I'd rather have story points being used to convince the pathers to bugger-off (like we do in the story) and maybe a tribute of AI cores to burn at the stake in exchange of them overlooking what's happening at home, that way they're not just accosting you for their monthly fix of gambling money at the nearest TT casino and membership fund to their favourite AI-Vtuber.

Pirates being too easy to bribe if it were so is understandable. Yet, as some said, it doesn't have to be credits, nor for every encounter:

-Pirates scanning your ship patrol-style, noticing how you're ferrying some fine booty, and thus demanding you to partake in a generous transfer so that you and the void of space stay separate today. This could be devastating for early/midgame trading if you don't have anything to cushion it.
-Some captain could look at one of your ships and go "i like it", losing one good vessel instead of all cough reloading cough. Maybe even spend a story point later on to find the rascal again to get it back once stronger.

Those are the systems i can think of(some of which already exist such as the doritos wanting some friend) that aren't simply "spend mana points or it's game-over" as those bring nothing to a story except making the player want to go back to the last save.

7

General Discussion / Re: Story mission question

« on: August 26, 2023, 12:02:36 AM »

Hello all, I have a very brief question, and I don't want specific answers, please keep any answers vague if possible. Oh also story mission spoilers ahead, beware.

Spoiler

Are there more story missions in the game beyond getting the janus device, getting the executor from the sindrian diktat, and visiting all the Ludd shrines? I'm currently doing a 100% story run for my youtube channel and I don't want to miss any story content, but if it's impossible to find, how will I find it?  I also don't want to search the sector for IRL days and find nothing.   

[close]

I've been way out of the loop on this game for years now, But I know there are still people here that have been active since the olden days. Thanks for your help!

Just to be certain, regarding visiting all shrines, was the last one Gilead? If not, be sure to visit it again.

8

Suggestions / Re: What should the Historian ramble about?

« on: August 24, 2023, 07:04:47 AM »

A question that's been bugging me is why does pretty much everyone we meet seem to be very close to baseline human? It seems like they've basically nailed mind-machine interfacing, which sets the stage for a fairly transhumanist setting, but we don't see things like full-body cyborgs or even extensive augmentation. Is this due to Domain laws or some other factor?

There's some texts referencing cybernetic augmentations, however the world is not Cyberpunk where you can fit a datapad, a shotgun, mantis mandibles and an umbrella in your forearms.
The Domain does seem to have been very anti-cyborg/AI (that wasn't them), as is the Hegemony, and as is the extremely prominent Luddic Church with believers everywhere, and most of those who don't certainly aren't fond of those either.

Most modifications seem to be stealthy/humanlike as to avoid standing out(as it would equate to begging to be shot on sight on any world with at least one luddite), such as bodyguards, TT higher ups, and most in positions of power obviously benefit from potent life extension (either biological or machine, the former possibly explaining the massive organ market, with very old people wanting replacements) such as bi-centenarian Lobster-Lord Kanta.
There's a very prominent case of overt extensive cyborgification in the form of the quirky neon toaster, which is so modified people can't tell if it's a boy, girl, or straight-up an AI that took over some idiot's body (might explain my urge to throw that infuriating Big-Bang-Theory grade heresy into the nearest star).

A Beta core turned a research center into it's own soap opera for entertainment, Alpha cores hold job security much dearly, and Omega does whatever including TT being heavily hinted at being a puppet of those.
Considering this, i very much doubt any mechanical body parts able to interact with other things in any way are considered safe for use beyond the insane, desperate and the forced, i sure wonder if TT has a required TriChiptm for employees.

9

Suggestions / Re: Smoothing out the player power curve

« on: August 21, 2023, 02:58:19 PM »

No, just no. If you want to smooth out the curve, just cut(by 2, 3, 4, whatever) player income. That will naturally force you to stay longer at any given "power level". And, well, fix black market so money actually has some value.

We certainly don't need to balance for blind luck of finding a random Legion XIV in a sandbox game...

Let's be honest black market trading is busted due to being so easy and inconsequential, even more now that we've got a free ability sending patrols on a ghost hunt.
Although my complaint isn't really here (semi-related grievances, such as how it's actually grey-market and how the back-alley shops have larger, shinier, and mightier fleets to sell than the official one), challenges in a sandbox tend to be self-imposed.

Spoiler

I'd recommend trying out an upstanding citizen run, no black market whatsoever, no buying warships (non-criminal bar events and multirole type kite/mule/venture allowed), no free storage, and delaying your first colony for the longest to see what you can reach.

[close]

There's also the simpler truth of save-scumming (guilty as charged), in reality most runs would end abruptly, and i doubt many had the strength of will to go on if ever wiped with S-ships and colony items in cargo to be forever lost.

10

General Discussion / Re: How do i disable the new event system ?

« on: August 21, 2023, 02:08:33 AM »

You can mostly neuter it by going into Starsector/starsector-core/data/config/settings then scrolling down (about a fifth of the way) until you find
##### HOSTILE ACTIVITY EVENT CONFIG #####
You can then change the values to reduce/nullify the hostility increases and impacts and/or increase the hostility reduction.

11

General Discussion / Re: No map size increasing mod anymore?

« on: August 20, 2023, 06:10:28 PM »

There's still Adjusted Sector in the mod index, you only need to change the game version in the mod_info file to 0.96 instead of 0.95.1
Some have claimed that it prevents some content from the latest version, but have yet to point out what exactly, if at all.

12

General Discussion / Re: The Usurpers, Dolos Macario intro dialogue

« on: August 20, 2023, 08:33:31 AM »

I guess the question is, how much would adding an explicit "decline" option even achieve? If you don't want to do the quest, simply don't progress it after "accepting". Unless there are some unique plot events for declining, there's no difference.

As much as I don't like the kind of protagonist Starsector forces on me, there's only so much a single writer can do in reasonable time. It would be unfair to expect endless roleplaing depth from a game that's ultimately about spaceships blowing up.

I never even picked the refusal "options" (or carried any potentially compromising item) as i assumed it would end with my lead-filled corpse feeding the lobsters, same with the Path questline where i basically went all-in in de-escalation.
I know the game would never kill the player out of space combat as it would be reload/game-over, yet getting away with decisions that at least should mean you not seeing the light of a star for some time (detention/ransom), doesn't bode that well regarding a narrative.

Honestly, i'm quite satisfied with the current broadness ranging from curious and respectful to "I don't like you, just your wallet", as you said that depth of roleplaying options is no easy task, especially when not the main focus.
I also assume that it'd be far simpler to create an opposite questline than one that branches at every step.

13

Suggestions / Re: Go ham on the colony mechanics

« on: August 18, 2023, 10:51:04 AM »

Regarding the AI colonisation part, it's a tough matter.
In Nex, the AI tend to take spots that the player do not even know about, you've lost a ruin and planetary data at best, and the prime spot for establishing yourself at worst.

The (vanilla) Sector isn't that big as it's tuned toward the player only, and there should be a reason as to why the factions are suddenly deciding that 206+ is when they should try expanding.

The cleanest way i can see it being done would be the same as when you sell blueprints/industry items on the market, so that when you sell a planet's data (although having to differentiate them in code doesn't sound smooth) to a faction, the later can consider a colonial expedition.
This way the player always gets to be first in addition to having agency in the matter.

Maybe intel/contact events such as "promising world found over there!" that you can check before a main faction goes at it itself.

14

General Discussion / Re: Officers are a pain!

« on: August 09, 2023, 12:01:27 PM »

Honestly never liked officiers, be it this version or the previous as it just means you get 10 super ships with everything else being filler for the meatgrinder, along forcing the player to chose between suffering in the overworld or playing a rts (which i always do, yet i highly doubt to be the majority).

The limit could be lenient so that most ships (AI included) have one along a possibility to rotate them for different builds instead of having to plan the perfect fleet day 1.
Maybe traits such as "AI war veteran" "Devout" "pre-collapse meat-popsicle" or whatever to spice things up and encourage exploration, certain commissions and bar-combing.
This should open more options for interaction, instead of just being painfully annoying to level trinkets, they could be friends, traitors, sent somewhere M&B style, have them potentially sink with the ship for some dynamism Rimworld style.

15

General Discussion / Re: i dont think OP ships should be nerfed

« on: June 06, 2021, 06:22:52 PM »

I maintain what i implicitly said, a customer does not know what he wants, it's up to the producer to find what works, same goes for players and devs.

About that point of "you want something nerfed that you do not play", i do not use the Doom because A: not my playstyle and B: still entrenched in 0.9.1. Considering how broken the thing is and how broken enemies are unless the former is used, i would be driven into that corner, as right now playing midlines+carriers and ignoring lowtech entirely.

I'm not special, just part of the niche that enjoy that kind of stuff, i like my corner and management tabs, yet recognise that this niche has no right subjugating others who want no part in it yet have to (be it consciously or not).
We are our most biased viewpoint, observing communities as a whole and acknowledging (not necessarily rejecting) our biases when doing so is primordial to understanding trends and mechanisms.

Maybe there's a truth about good being subjective (that i view as the go-to "defence" when something someone likes is being "attacked", both a wound and insult to all artforms), but an absolute one is the playerbase. If your game offer options, viable ones are those that count, others might as well not exist.
A busted option does this to an even greater degree.

In both solo and multi, the advantaged playstyle defends it's position, while the others complain, if devs give-in, the nerfed side (if within reason) cries a bit before calming down, but when the status-quo remain, everyone else quietly leaves, entering a negative feedback loop of dwindling population but higher ratio of pro status-quo.

As for that point you made on the P2W game, it is flawed logic, and for two reasons:

-You wouldn't need to find the fun through cheats in the first place if the game was good (which is solely incompatible with P2W games, took years to learn that), it takes time to know when something is bad, as even poking a dead rat with a stick can be entertaining for some time.

-You only reference your point of view, which you did the whole time, everything is subjective but only if it's from someone else. What about the large majority of the playerbase that did not get to find such cheats to essentially gain the benefits of those with a bottomless credit card? Did they find the fun?

The truth is whatever gets to be reliably viable within it's niche, games inside those search for the truth in question.
The best representation of this idea is the essay on DayZ from Sovietwomble.

Multiplayer is inherently different and more likely to provide entertainment (IE: not fun, entertainment. Can be the kind players loathe but still play) and as such while more active, also more forgiving of it's flaws.

A solo experience is it's own description.
It HAS to stand on it's two feet and provide to the player entirely by itself, the core gameplay loop has to suck the player in and keep-up for hours if not days, helped by the flavours around it.
ALL flavours have to live around said loop, those fully in the shadow are useless load bound to disappoint, those basked in light completely alter the intended journey, and hold an addiction that take long to notice until you realise you spent the whole voyage in a semi-conscious daze.