Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Codex Overhaul (05/11/24)

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.

Topics - Drone_Fragger

Pages: [1]
Suggestions / Drifting Hyperspace ships
« on: June 12, 2021, 11:47:17 AM »
So... We all know what happens you run out of fuel - You drift, helplessly, to the nearest gravity well and pop into it. Pretty straight forward.

Now... it doesn't really make sense, when you think about it, for disabled and drifting ships, in hyperspace, to continue drifting subject to regular space time constraints such as "keep going in this direction". It makes more sense for them to, like the player, drift to the nearest hyperwell and drop into it. They assumably, at this point, have no functioning drive field, after all.

My suggestion is therefore, if a ship is disabled or destroyed in hyperspace fights, and becomes a derelict, after maybe 2 days (to allow the player to loot it, with some spiel about the drive field failing due to lack of maintenance) it drifts towards the nearest hyperspace well with the same logic of the player and drops into it, then maintains orbit around it. These could then be treated like the normal wrecks that you'd find orbiting planets and suchlike, and could maybe have the same loot tables - weighted by distance to the core worlds. Would be an interesting semi-renewable source of derelict loot and make a bit more sense thematically.

Bug Reports & Support (modded) / [0.9.1a RC8] Uncompletable fights
« on: June 16, 2019, 02:30:31 PM »
Essentially, I am having fights where every single enemy ship is dead or retreated, but I cannot force victory - The game seems to believe there is still some kind of enemy ship left on the map which is preventing me from achieving a "clean field" victory, while simultaneously the AI has not yielded the fight which would let me claim victory via the menu. The only option is to force a mass retreat on my ships and then just leave the fight - a sub optimal outcome since obviously this means you will lose salvage rewards.

This doesn't seem to be repeatable, fighting the same fight several times resulted in this happening once out of the 5 or 6 times I tried the fight, so I am not sure if my save game will be any use in this case.

Now, the only thing I can think is consistent between these occurrences is that it seems to occur when enemy ships retreat. I think it is possible some situation is occurring where AI ships which have been "manually" retreated by the AI due to being too damaged still count towards the AI's assessment of what ships it has in play - hence if it retreats a bunch of damaged or near death ships, it counts these retreated ships as being "in play" and giving it the false impression of the fight still being worth continuing.

Mods I'm using are uh, Lazylib, graphicslib, magiclib, starship legends, underworld, ship/weapon pack, nexellerin, disassemble reassamble, brdy and arsenal expansion.

General Discussion / Fleets "ganging up" seems to be.... missing?
« on: December 20, 2018, 11:04:06 AM »
I'm not actually sure if it's a bug or just my perception, but the previous activity of numerous small fleets to "gang up" on larger fleets seems to no longer be functional. A good example is in the tutorial, normally, both fleets guarding the jump point (or, after the mission, the 4 or 5 fleets around the mining station) will go straight towards you, even though your fleet is bigger than each of the fleets singularly. Currently, on the 4 or so games I've played now in 0.9, fleets will just e-burn away in these kind of conditions, rather than checking for neighbours and determine that together they can fight you.

Has anyone else noticed or experienced this? I'm genuinely not sure if it's a bug that needs reporting or just confirmation bias or what.

Suggestions / Colony "Capacity"
« on: November 24, 2018, 04:00:13 PM »
Essentially, every planet now is essentially identical except with some modifiers on them that make them more or less habitable, with accompanying flavour text. Habitability only really effects population growth and the overheads of running the colony (200% habitability = 200% running costs). However, none of these modifiers prevent some very silly occurrences, such as Barren, irradiated planets apparently being capable of housing populations of hundreds of millions without issue, despite the obvious logistical difficulties of running a colony where the environment is described as being "extremely hazardous to even hardened robotics" and people needing to wear bulky hazmat suits to go outside, if ever.

Hence, what I'm suggesting is that planets have a semi-hidden "Capacity" factor which indicates an absolute maximum size that a colony can reach. Any planet that is Habitable automatically has a fairly high capacity, and any planet that needs extensive works to maintain life (huge, underground facilities, floating sky-habitats, etc) generally doesn't. Larger Planets have a higher innate capacity, and smaller planets have a lower innate capacity. Modifiers which have obvious effect have some effect on capacity too. High gravity, for instance, is going to reduce it due to buildings needing to be built lower and taking up more useful land area, Extreme tectonics is going to reduce it by requiring earthquake proof buildings, while similarly, ones like low gravity will increase the capacity. New modifiers could additionally be added which could have combination effects, for example "Deep caves" or similar that increase the planet hazard, but increase it's capacity by a similar amount due to the increased living space. Additionally, a "Colony Expansion" repeatable building could be added that fills a building slot on a colony which increases capacity by some amount, but has operating costs, representing the costs associated with running a giant eco dome on what could be the equivalent of Venus.

Why is this a good idea? Three reasons, Firstly, planet size or even really the type of planet matters very little when setting up a colony, other than it's operating costs, which generally become irrelevant as the colony gets bigger than 5 or 6 and has enough useful exports to fund itself, and becomes even less relevant once you are looting AI cores left right and centre to cut the operating costs by half. By adding a capacity factor, more care needs to be taken about where you situate your main colonies, and what to use as just simply "mining colonies" or similar for collecting or storing  the useful resources you need. You can't simply out grow the operating costs or grow the colony to a point where you're dominating the market anyway if the colony physically can't grow that much.
Secondly, for thematic purposes it feels more natural that colonies be generally situated on planets actually capable of sustaining life, and anything that isn't on a habitable planet is more out of necessity to obtain some kind of material reward for doing so (eg, resource extraction, tech mining, etc).
Thirdly: Flavour. Good quality habitable planets should feel like Gleaming Jewels in a Sea of filth, and even if they don't necessarily have amazing Primary industry stats on them, should still be valuable from the livability and maximum population that can be put to work on secondary industries such as light industry, refining or shipbuilding, even if it's importing everything from your smaller mining colonies that can't maintain a population of more than 4 or 5.

Pages: [1]