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.

31

Suggestions / Re: Increase the minimum and maximum amount of people at bars.

« on: May 24, 2021, 12:42:39 PM »

Also the fact that at least the smuggling job, probably also the spy sat deployment jobs I would guess, spawns patrol fleets around your target that otherwise wouldn't be there. Quite immersion breaking to be honest, since as a...well, "veteran" is perhaps too strong a word. But as a player who knows Cruor never has patrols around it it's quite immersion breaking to take a job to smuggle stuff to there and suddenly, out of the ether, there is a patrol fleet ready to make that job you took thoroughly not worth the effort. You could explain it as the contact setting you up, you being the distraction rather than the actual smuggler or something along those lines, but as far as I know no such interaction exists.

This alone is the reason I stopped taking those missions. It just feels 'gamey' to have a patrol fleet that hugs the objective like nothing else matters.

32

General Discussion / Re: What do you usually target with Fighters/Interceptors?

« on: May 23, 2021, 11:28:46 PM »

Ahh, well when protecting your fleet from lighter ships and phase ships, it makes sense to use fast and light fighters. So not the Warthog.

On the other hand if you're using Fighter Uplink with the full bonus, Warthogs do rather nicely enough. What really holds them back from cleaning up phase ships is the engagement range.

33

General Discussion / Re: Low Tech ship worst logistics

« on: May 23, 2021, 04:17:31 PM »

It does somewhat surprise me that the old, near-ubiquitous and reliable designs that in some cases were built to use the same parts as one another end up costing more than the state-of-the-art, fragile and specialist vessels.

34

General Discussion / Re: What do you usually target with Fighters/Interceptors?

« on: May 23, 2021, 04:08:16 PM »

Generally? My targeting priority is:

• Escort ships about to get spammed by missiles/fighters
• Pressure Phase Ships
• Pressure Frigates
• Assault Carriers w/ weak defenses (Condor/Colossus/Heron/etc.)
• Assault Cruisers/Destroyers currently fighting my line vessels, especially when their flux is high

Generally the goal is keeping my fleet alive by focusing on air superiority (handling enemy fighters/missiles), then clearing or distracting threats. Phase vessels in particular really hate being targeted by fighters, usually distracting them until they're dead or distant. I rarely target capital vessels with good PD unless they're 60-70% or higher on flux, and engaging one of my officered cruisers/capitals.

35

Mods / Re: [0.95a] Hazard Mining Incorporated (HiddenError2 Ed., 0.3.3o)

« on: May 22, 2021, 02:00:10 PM »

Finally I felt that it'd be cool for players fighting Derelicts to be given an occassional challenge in the mid to late game - nothing too hard, but something different and interesting. That's where the Objects come in - the 108 is faster than you expect for a derelict, the 361 packs more flexibility and more punch than a derelict should, and the 440 mixes up the traditional derelict fight by introducing a giant, strong shield. Each of the ships can be defeated by an early player, but they're weird enough to mix up fighting the derelicts so it's less of a monotonous experience in the mid to late game. From that perspective you shouldn't be using them as an automated ship - the remnant and domres ships are flat out better, as they should be.

For Derelicts intending to be beginner friendly, I would agree if not that using mods in the first place is not a common thing for beginners, especially in-depth content mods like factions and ship packs - and while I can understand keeping them lower power, the Embrasure in particular just felt somewhat off given it's background as a utility/salvaging drone yet having no value in either salvaging or mining. It made it feel like it just shouldn't be recoverable to begin with.

Regardless of the normal Derelicts though I suppose I should ask, do you ever plan on implementing DomRes versions of the Object classes? Even perhaps just for an IBB/HVB?

36

General Discussion / Re: Let's talk about the Prometheus MKII...

« on: May 13, 2021, 11:47:50 PM »

If you think of it as a Dominator merged with a Condor, with more flexible slots than either (and a Phaeton of fuel capacity shoved in) then it's really not a bad ship at all for the deployment cost.

Oh, and throw in the capital-grade hullmod scaling as a bonus.

37

Suggestions / Re: Make Cryosleeper increase the maximum colony size?

« on: May 13, 2021, 12:25:29 PM »

I think that’s a terrible idea.
If the bonus from these random structures are too good it will incentivize people to only play with good seeds. I think it’s better kept mediocre.

Going through a rare boss fight for a mediocre reward just feels terrible.

38

Suggestions / Re: Is Burn Drive (along with 0.95) the worst thing that ever happened to Low Tech?

« on: May 13, 2021, 12:04:18 PM »

While I tend to have a very potent disdain for Burn Drive, the Legion is the one ship I'll defend it on. Burn Drive has the really potent use of letting to close the distance it's wings need to keep engaged, doubly so if you're using fighters like the Warthog  with a shorter engagement range (which works very, very nicely with a Legion due to how close the ship loves to be). Reserve Deployment is only useful if you're already at the rock bottom replacement rate of 30%, otherwise it's a button you have to avoid pressing not to *** on your replacement rate, even with stacking Fighter skills/hullmods.

The Legion is slow as molasses and serves best when it can keep up to support it's own fighters, and Burn Drive is perfect for that alone. The only other system I'd consider useful for it might be Targeting Feed, but that'd be notably harder to balance for a Combat Carrier like the Legion (as it so far only exists on one of the most defenseless Carriers).

39

Mods / Re: [0.95a] Hazard Mining Incorporated (HiddenError Ed., 0.3.3n)

« on: May 08, 2021, 11:42:39 PM »

Will the Explorarium Drones added (not the DomRes ones) get a second look in the future with the addition of Automated Ships? They're currently fairly underwhelming. On the lower end, the Embrasure feels like it doesn't really have a purpose to the player (Especially for 9 DP), I would've hoped it might at least have Salvage Gantry/Surveying Equipment given it's background - or perhaps a strong bonus to Nex mining. While on the higher end, the rarer Object classes have potential and are quite cool in their design, yet end up quite lackluster compared to their Remnant and DomRes alternatives just by their exceedingly high DP costs.

I hope this feedback doesn't come off as too vague, I'm just hoping the drones might get a bit more love to be more appealing to the player in the future.

40

General Discussion / Re: Simple poll: Do you like the old skill system or new skill system more

« on: May 05, 2021, 07:54:30 AM »

I love the new skills for the most part, bar some small gripes with DP limits. My only particular gripe with 0.95 isn't the skills themselves but rather the imbalance of options at some tiers, such as with Automated Ships competing with the obscenely better Special Modifications to where you actively gimp yourself by not choosing the latter - or a particular offender, Carrier Group competing with Crew Training when Carriers highly value their CR (Due to how fighters rely on the CR of their Carrier, if Carrier Group boosted CR of ships w/ wings by 15% I'd be much happier). Overall though, I agree with their layout on the skill tree.

I do also love that skills are, on paper, far more meaningful upgrades and offer some interesting decisions (Coordinated Maneuvers vs Wolfpack Tactics) on what you plan to do with your fleet.

41

General Discussion / Re: [0.95a] Some decent ship loadouts

« on: May 05, 2021, 07:42:43 AM »

I think you're putting far too many caps and vents on those logistics ships, when you could easily fit in a few more worthwhile hull-mods like Insulated Engine Assembly for lower sensor profile or Unstable Injectors so they can be a little faster on a bad retreat. High Resolution Sensors is also a fantastic pick for them! Overall, logistics ships really don't care about caps/vents, given not one could fight off even a measly Kite by itself.

Besides the logistics, I don't really have much to comment on bar that the built-in ITU on the Heron might be better replaced by a shield hullmod.

42

Suggestions / Re: Auxiliary Support skill: raise deployment recovery cost cap from 5 to 8

« on: April 21, 2021, 05:07:38 PM »

I'd love this, the selection currently of both high and low-end vanilla civilian ships isn't particularly overwhelming - and a single super-tanky Venture or actually decent gunboat Atlas Mk.2 likely shouldn't break fleet balance. Nor would I imagine it breaking hard on the lower end with a pair of 'super' Buffalo Mk.2s, or 4 Mudskipper Mk.2s.

Most of the Civilian ships are subpar in their mounts and don't benefit too much at all from the buffs (Venture, even when 'super-tanked', also suffers from abysmal speed to boot), while the Pirate variants have flaws that the skill can at least counteract and allow a few viable alternatives to the standard military vessels.

43

Suggestions / Re: Gunnery Implants makes Devastator Cannons awkward/worse in their role

« on: April 21, 2021, 04:53:54 PM »

Hardpoint emplacements, the ones that don't rotate more than 15 degrees or whatever, further reduce recoil. Maybe a redundant point, as I was thinking of haephestus guns when you mentioned devastator.

I wouldn't likely use a Devastator on Hardpoints for PD/Anti-Fighter roles, the spread is valuable and most ships with Large Ballistic mounts have weak maneuverability. The recoil reduction for the Hephaestus does make that weapon quite a lot better, which is why I'm rather stuck on thinking of a solution to this issue that'd help the Devastator without hurting the skill as a whole or making the Devastator potentially quite garbage without the skill.

Last version, at least, reduced spread with high range and increased shot speed made Devastators into actually good general purpose HE. All the shots would fly in a narrow stream and many of them would go to max range.

Yep, I do like that it opens new options with the weapon - I just wish I could selectively disable it if I want to use Devastators for Anti-Fighter roles. It especially hurts when Gunnery Implants is so good for making the medium/small PD weapons exceptional at their role, which sets up a fantastic multi-layer defense against Carriers when paired with non-recoil reduced Devastators.

44

General Discussion / Re: Automated Ships skill sucks

« on: April 21, 2021, 04:40:23 PM »

Having to use Crew Training to get the best use out of crewless ships feels like bad design in more than a few ways. As it stands, it feels like this skill's limit was designed to cover the possibilities of Gamma-Frigate spam, or a single Alpha-Radiant. Everything else just feels somewhat subpar in overall fleet value compared to Special Modifications; whether you're using it for a couple of Fulgents or Scintillas, or a single good Brilliant.

It doesn't help either that the Explorarium Drones are held back immensely by their abysmal OP, with the Rampart as the 'best' choice still holding rather low terrible potential in most scenarios compared with the competing Brilliant or just a regular Dominator. I never feel any particular inclination to experiment with the Destroyer and Frigate-sized Explorarium Drones, as there's not truly much you can do with such a low OP limit.

On a similar thought, I would also question if the Guardian might ever be recoverable, given there're no larger ships on the high-end of DP costs that compete with the Radiant. I could see a player-usable version having less OP or a weakened Autoforge, but even with the Guardian's current stats a Radiant is extremely strong competition at the same DP cost. I'd just like more viable options to compete with the currently favoured uses of the skill.

Edit: I didn't even consider until now that the Rampart is extremely worse with the Impact Mitigation nerf, previously it could at least function as an aggressive armour-tank when loaded with an Alpha Core and built-in Heavy Armour+Mod of Choice (SO/Bulkheads/whatever you felt like). But raw armour/hull-tanking got a big, big hit with the last hotfix.

45

Suggestions / Gunnery Implants makes Devastator Cannons awkward/worse in their role

« on: April 21, 2021, 03:56:56 PM »

To put it simply, reducing the recoil on Devastators makes them actively worse against Fighter and Bomber swarms, as the more narrow spray with GI can't keep up with the wide formations favoured by Fighter Wings. Without the reduction, Devastators can more reliably saturate the area and stop grouped-up swarms of Missiles and Fighters.

This was present before the latest hotfix, but was something I'd avoided by choosing not to upgrade GI to Elite on any build where I was using Devastators on my Flagship. It's the only vanilla weapon that seems to be negatively affected by this skill, so I don't exactly know what sort of fix to suggest for this that wouldn't directly nerf the weapon or the skill, and it's a very disappointing interaction given that otherwise GI is a fantastic skill for any Officer piloting a ship with a good array of PD weaponry.