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

Mods / Re: [0.95a] Underworld 1.6.1

« on: July 18, 2021, 03:50:35 AM »

Is there any way to simply remove the Cabal from this mod? I'm interested in expanding the pirate ship selection, but have no interest in the Cabal and their ships.

32

Mods / Re: [0.95a] Nexerelin v0.10.2c "Mercenaries and Patriots" (fixes 2021-06-12)

« on: July 17, 2021, 11:26:43 PM »

System for ceasefire/peace declarations seems to only be on a by faction basis, NOT a per alliance basis.  But calling a war vote is on an alliance basis.  So sometimes a faction that signs a ceasefire/peace agreement with you is quickly or even immediately pulled back into a war with you by an alliance partner calling for and winning a war vote.  Appears to mostly depend on you rep with all faction members of any particular alliance.

Can't tell if this is a true software bug by not having the peace treaty/ceasefire applied across an entire alliance, or whether this is just an unintended result.  Or maybe intended.  Basically you have to spend dat colony money on agents always raising your rep with any factions that hate you until you are either strong/rich enough to not care or have an alliance of your own... although since so much will be changing in a few months with 0.951ab being released, may not matter until after that!

Still, would be nice for agents to have a high risk mission to cause false flag diplomatic incidents to either weaken or break up alliances, since Hegemony always seems to immediately ally with Luddic Church or Persean League regardless of the in-game lore stating that each of the three "powers" fundamentally disagree with each of the other factions' philosophy/ethics/morals.  Although perhaps I'm playing this mod wrong, supposedly the main powers are less likely to ally with one another if you have a few extra faction adding mods...

Per faction/alliance diplomacy, that makes sense to an extent (even if it is still very wonky and too spastic in execution to feel immersive), but I have observed this happening outside of alliance completely as well (that two day instance I mentioned was purely between Tri-Tachyon and Hegemony).

To be more specific, none of these instances I'm seeing have been with my own faction, this has been within the first few cycles between AI factions, and it is just so incredibly all over the place.

Maybe I'm being too critical, which I am a bit too much with things I like a lot (this mod is fantastic). I just wish the war and peace dealings were somewhat more immersive and that there weren't multiple start and stop wars within the week oftentimes. It feels so all over the place sometimes that the factions just start to lose their personalities, and it's just mindless fluctuations.

Also keep in mind that if an agent is discovered doing A Thing against a faction that recently signed a ceasefire with another, that can easily lead to another war scenario.

This makes sense, absolutely. I've seen that happen here and there, but oddly enough (to this point at least), those haven't been the inciting factor of any conflicts, just reduced relations (that has obviously edged factions closer to war, or course).

In the end, my main point is just that I feel like actual declarations of war and peace should feel more meaningful and solid, as opposed to just flittering around by the week, back and forth.

33

Mods / Re: [0.95a] Nexerelin v0.10.2c "Mercenaries and Patriots" (fixes 2021-06-12)

« on: July 17, 2021, 07:33:03 AM »

Apologies if this has been mentioned or talked about before, but I am noticing that the war/peace declarations seem really wonky (not sure if it's just in newer versions or not, I don't seem to recall it being so all over the place in the past). I haven't gotten very far into my latest playthrough, and three or four times now, factions and alliances have made peace or agreed to ceasefires, just for them to declare war again (whether via alliance vote or otherwise) a week or so later.

There was one instance where the ceasefire was overwritten by a war declaration two days later. Not sure if it's intended or not, but it just seems a bit odd and minorly immersion breaking. If two factions are committing to some sort of political agreement of peace, and they broke the agreement, ceasefire, etc, a few days later, they would quickly become massively distrusted by just about everyone (which isn't happening). It feels like there needs to be some sort of system in place where these agreements last a reasonable length of time, or have a smaller chance to be overridden so incredibly quickly.

34

General Discussion / Re: Making allies attack specific station sections?

« on: July 17, 2021, 07:25:42 AM »

Thanks for the tips, I was just more specifically asking about how to more consistently command AI ships to attack a specific segment of a station. High flux probably is the best bet and why my successful attempt went so well, making sure that I initiated the first strike with squalls and better directing their focus.

I'll definitely have to keep that in mind, there just definitely are times where not being able to actually command them to attack a specific point leads them to make really dumb decisions that are out of your control.

35

General Discussion / Making allies attack specific station sections?

« on: July 16, 2021, 01:02:14 AM »

Currently trying to take down an incredibly beefy battlestation, and I just feel incredibly limited by my allies. It's a relatively lean fleet, Astral flagship, two Furies, one destroyer and a number of frigates, so I know it's a rough prospect, but I know it's doable. The problem is, to take this thing down, I need to focus the entire fleet on the station's "heads" (or whatever you would call them), before hitting its three segments.

This is the problem. On one run, allies relatively did what I asked and attacked what I was attacking (the largest "head", to start). We were able to take all three heads down, and one of the main segments, before we just ran out of steam and got wiped out. On subsequent runs, I'm experiencing the frustration of the allied AI just not attacking what you want them to attack. You can't tell them "attack THIS part of the station" in the command screen, and while they seem to generally focus on what you're targeted on in combat, it's just horribly inconsistent, and I'll have a quarter or more of the fleet just randomly circling around the station to attack something else, uselessly, before getting annihilated.

I've tried eliminate orders, different escort orders, both, etc, and they just don't consistently do what I want them to do. Not to mention how on half of my tries, regardless if I tell them to escort my Astral, move to and remain at a point further away from the station, etc, random ships (especially the Furies, ugh) will just take it upon themselves to rush forward, allow the station to focus on them from 3000m+ away, and immediately lose half their hull or die within the first 60 seconds.

I don't know, it just feels like allied AI just has no idea what to do with battlestations, regardless of what you ask them to do. The easy answer is just amassing a much larger fleet, more focus on long range capital ships, etc, but it really is frustrating, because I know my current setup is absolutely doable (as one run demonstrated), but I just can't seem to wrangle the AI to strike decisively and behave intelligently when it comes to battlestations.

Any ideas?


EDIT: And as soon as I complain, they miraculously did almost exactly what I wanted, and we picked the station apart piece by piece with only a couple frigates and salvaged fodder ships lost. So bizarre, I still need to figure out how to help them be more consistent when you're trying to target specific station segments.

36

General Discussion / Confusing issue with keybinding (randomly triggering commands)

« on: July 13, 2021, 07:39:56 PM »

So, I've been trying to bind active system (F, normally) and vent (V, normally) to the side mouse buttons (mouse 3 and 4), and I'm having a weird issue where the active system just randomly triggers by itself once I do this, and vent just... doesn't really happen once I rebind it like this, and only triggers maybe 1 out of 5 presses of the button.

It's a relatively new mouse, it has no such issue in any other game (they don't randomly click by themselves, they're properly responsive, etc), so I'm just baffled on why this is happening. Any ideas?

37

General Discussion / Re: Same weapon in multiple weapon groups? (Mod?)

« on: July 12, 2021, 08:38:32 PM »

Honestly curious because I've never played that game: how does a weapon in multiple groups work and what benefit does it bring? What can you do with that setup that can't be done currently? A weapon being in multiple groups naively to me sounds absolutely awful, but multiple people have asked over the years so I'm curious.

Short story, a quick and easy way to use exactly which combination of weapons you want to manually use at any point. Why you'd want to do that? Any number of reasons, but I would say the most important would be energy management, situationally based on what you need to do.

In Freelancer, for example, you had a similar weapon spread as Starsector, where you have your shield killers, hull killers, missiles, etc etc. So in some cases, you would just want to go guns blazing with everything, rush the enemy down since it has similar shield/hull values, is a quickly destructible target, while with others you may want to go full shield killers to conserve energy while you slowly whittle away at a gunboat's shields, or any other combination of things that may vary wildly depending on your own ships (the system is useful on anything from a fighter to a battleship).

In the end, it just adds more accessible and particular usage of which weapons you want. Obviously the game can still be played without it, but it would a very nice addition to the game, especially for people like me who worked with that sort of system for years in other relatively similar games.

38

General Discussion / Re: Same weapon in multiple weapon groups? (Mod?)

« on: July 12, 2021, 05:36:58 PM »

Due to how the weapon groups are defined in game it's not possible unless the very fabric of the game is refactored and the AI re-written to accommodate. Which is practically Starsector 2.0.

Well, that is bizarre and unfortunate. Thanks for the info anyhow.

39

General Discussion / Re: Same weapon in multiple weapon groups? (Mod?)

« on: July 12, 2021, 05:21:49 PM »

So what would happen if a weapon is in both group A and B but only one of them is set to auto fire? Should it auto fire?

I mean, if it's still not something that is in game at this point, that sort of behavior would certainly need to be specified in mod settings. I think ideally, if x weapon was in weapon group 1 and 3, and auto-fire in 3, it would auto-fire in 3 until the player actively has weapon group 1 selected. Player discretion would be best to dictate how they want that to behave of course, if such a mod existed and could be configured to some extent.

But I suppose that answers my question. Still not a thing, darn.

40

General Discussion / Same weapon in multiple weapon groups? (Mod?)

« on: July 12, 2021, 05:05:45 PM »

Coming from games like Freelancer, and coming back to Starsector after a couple years, I'm curious if there is still no way to assign weapons to multiple weapon groups (e.g. Assigning one singular mining blaster to weapon group 1, 2, and 4, etc, as opposed to just 1, 2, or 4). I've always been confused why this has been impossible, because it's an extremely useful feature that I've always felt has been lacking from Starsector.

Have there been any changes in the meantime that allow this? Or have there been any mods that add this functionality?