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 - Alex

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1442
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Pre-Order code not received
« on: Today at 09:30:12 PM »
Hi - I'm sorry about the trouble! I'm not seeing any orders for that number or for the email you registered on the forum with. Would you mind sending an email with your info to orders [at] bmtmicro [dot] com? They should be able to tell you what happened.

Suggestions / Re: Converted Hanger Rebalancing
« on: Today at 08:58:04 PM »
Hmm - that's a good point. Maybe this ought to include both the supply cost and the deployment points, then, so it's not quite so automatic in the early game.

In regards to the fury, I tried it out with the upcoming changes to burst pds and typhoons in this layout:

Noted this one too, thank you!

(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)
For Converted Hangar, does that mean...
* Fighters cost normal OP?
* Expanded Deck Crew can be added?

Sorry it wasn't clear, I just meant the damage taken/speed penalties and the d-mod overlay.

Wasn't DTA the cheapest hullmod in the game? +100 range seems like a fairly minor upside then.

One of - I think it's a pretty strong bonus! Maybe not for the Xyphos, but that's alright.

Make sure to enjoy your mining auroras while you can. Our beloved mining arrays will be hybrid weapons soon so you won't be able to do this anymore :-[

Oh no! BRB rolling back changes.

This is out of left field but have you ever had to use yer data backup service to recover Starsector's source code? Could we have lost Starsector forever because of a power outage or hard drive failure?

I haven't, no. But: using an external 3rd-party source code (etc) repository, which has its own backups. And at any time, the most recent code (etc) (up to within a day or so) is on both my and David's computers. So there's a good amount of redundancy here.

Also, is this patch further along than when you normally post patch notes or do we still have a couple months of additional tweaks and play testing?


Suggestions / Re: Converted Hanger Rebalancing
« on: Today at 08:16:35 PM »
I'd like to see it removed from Frigates in any case. Doesn't seem realistic.

It already can't be installed on frigates, I'm pretty sure!

I was under the impression that CH on larger hulls have a reduced penalty on the Fighters but I can't seem to back that up anywhere. Or, though it would be a hidden stat, the Replacement Rate for larger hulls is significantly better. Let's say a Destroyer's CH RR is 50% of a "standard" hangar, Cruiser is 75%, and Capital has no penalty.

I think it used to be, but isn't anymore.


This is kinda half-hijacking this thread, but I've been thinking about Converted Hangar recently and how maybe pure OP is not the best balance lever for it. I mean, it works, but - how to best put it. It feels like for balance reasons, the OP cost (of the fighter, especially) is high - it has to be - and so the rest of the build is hollowed out by this a bit, when it's something like a Xyphos. This isn't the case when it's used to mount some cheaper interceptors such as Wasps, and that's viable, and in general this *does* work. It just feels like a "this hull is weak, so let's replace a good portion of its potential with a Xyphos wing to bring it up to par" kind of situation sometimes. (And the Buffalo Mk.II herd strategy, while highly amusing, is the distillation of this idea that the ship mainly becomes just a way to get the fighters on the field.)

What if Converted Hangar cost something like 5 OP across the board, the fighters had no penalties (increased cost or otherwise), but it increased the ship's deployment points by something like "+3 or 10%, whichever is higher"? It would be something that unquestionably augments the ship's capabilities, but "is this worth using on this ship" becomes a more interesting fleet-wide question. I'm still thinking on this, but the more I think about it, the more appealing it seems.

General Discussion / Re: How do you make the game's AI work?
« on: Today at 12:23:41 PM »
(Yes, but it's also a nice idea to update the OP in case people don't. Let's all get along, eh?)

One question I wanted to ask, just to make sure: do you have Integrated Targeting Unit or at least Dedicated Targeting Core installed on all of your cruisers and capital ships? It's not going to compensate enough to make weapons like the Ion Pulser work on Eagles, for example, but it's more or less required to make most normal loadouts work. Destroyers should generally have it, too, though that's more situational.

Colossus already has both the hammer barrage and the burn drive.

A good point.

I see. Although the issue is less about the bonus and more about that current shield shunt is weaker than it probably should (No shield for 15% armor feels eeeeeh) but then when you S-Mod it it jumps to 30% and that is way better. So there is this situation where shield shunt is either too weak to consider or now a viable choice at a premium.
In short in the current state shield shunt more or less comes with a tax for it to work at a level that is worth the mechanical shift that it comes with.
Or something like that. I am not good at words.

I understand what you mean, yeah. I feel like that's a separate conversation about the balance of shield shunt that can be decoupled from s-mod effects.

Well that aside can i pry you about the s-mod effects of converted hangar and defensive targeting array?

(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)

I can't wait to continue the main story line. Still amazing just how good the writing is in Starsector.
There are LOADS of open world (or open galaxy, if you will) games that excel at the open thing and games, that have absolutely incredible story lines.

Starsector is the only game that i know of, that can pull both of those off this brilliantly.

I gotta emphasize the writing again. It keeps you hooked once you get into it. Especially with all the teasers along the way.

Pretty sure the moment this update releases, I'm gotta get a spontaneos case of... something and unfortunately have to take a week off of work.

Ahh, thank you! I'm rather a fan of David's writing, myself :)

(Just to be super clear, while there's a bunch more story in this release, the "main" storyline ends in the same place, for now.)

Regarding the Fury tangent discussion,

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

Thank you! Made a note of this to check it out and see how it feels.

Vanshilar's got some data and a build in a couple threads, one is:
That compares some kill times of mono cruiser fleets + player Onslaught vs double Ordo.
I thought he did a 15 DP vs 20 DP comparison as well against Ordos but can't find it.  I think the variation he used for that was something like:

And these, too - thank you!

Last thing that I really liked and worked well vs various opponents is Ion Pulser + Phase Lance, then pick a missile of your choice (I'd use Breaches if AI wasn't scared to fire them), AM Blaster and IR Pulse Laser in those 2 smalls that can fire forward. Two Burst PDs in the back mounts and Front shield conversion, max vents and rest into caps. I like this build since it doesn't require many hullmods. Obviously when you invest story points you can get ITU and something else.

... and this!

... and the other ones! Thank you all! :)

What would your current thoughts be on reducing the OP on the Legion XIV back to what it currently is? I ask because currently, though this is subject to change depending on the new caps, the Legion XIV is considered one of the stronger capitals largely because, unlike its base counterpart, its a capable long range support with its two large missiles and 4 fighter bays while also capable of being a strong front-liner with its tougher armor and 5 medium ballistics for only 40 DP and my main concern is that between the increased number and types of missiles and the +40 OP the XIV Legion has the potential to become even more oppressive compared to its peers. I'd understand if you'd not want to due to Legion XIV's rarity, because its only available to the player, and because it would be weird to not have XIV be a straight upgrade to its non-XIV version, but to that third I'd argue that its weird that the weapon mounts are different compared to its base version in the first place and the lower OP could just be the tradeoff of the conversion to Large missiles over ballistics from base.

I'm not married about having its OP be higher than the base variants, and you make a good point about feel/large slots/etc. On the other hand, I'm entirely unsold on the idea that the Legion XIV is one of the stronger capital. I think the idea of coordination via fighters and missiles is true in a somewhat more theoretical than practical way - like, if the Legions are able to coordinate vs a single target, it's either the start of a fight, or you've already started winning it; otherwise they've likely got their own problems to deal with. And if they're in the back rank and have the luxury of coordinating like this, then dedicated carriers would do better - e.g. the Astral.

I think more OP basically just gives it more hullmods - I think it can already get whatever fighters and weapons it really wants, and is a tad more limited on hullmods than I'd perhaps like. That said, I could see giving it +20 instead of +40, or some such. I'll definitely keep an eye on it.

I've read my way through the patch notes and I generally like the ideas proposed in the coming patch. Frankly, adding new music and a bunch of side story quests is the breathe of fresh air I have been wanting as a longtime player of the game. I'm really looking forward to seeing how the new weapons perform as well as I, too, have a love of insanely overbuilt mega-weapons that are just too powerful for their own good.

Now, I have an idea and a personal request combined for something to spice up exploration. Ruined world lore bits. Basically, when tech mining and to a far lesser extent doing your initial salvaging pass of a world with ruins on it, I think some generic lore bits about what kind of colony or outpost was there and what happened to it would be a fascinating way to add depth to the ruined sector and give you more of a feel of just how BAD things got post-collapse. For a while, at least. Doesn't have to be colony specific (although having special ruined colonies with special lore attached to them spawn would also be fun). Just a thought and my two cents.

Hi - thank you! And, hmm. Not sure how exactly we might do this, but the idea is very neat - making a note about it. I can totally see how it would add some depth - as long as it didn't try to over-explain things. Just little snippets, somewhere, perhaps. Worth thinking about!

Re: phase ship stuff - I think the problem isn't so much that you can't match the performance of the Shade (or Afflictor) in a larger fleet or with another ship. It's pretty fun to fly a phase ship in support of other ships, imo. It gets boring trying to do a solo type of thing, though - fly through, rinse, repeat. FWIW, I tried a similar build just now vs an Ordo and - I mean, I'm definitely not great at this specifc type of piloting, but it was challenging to deal with ships with omni shields. You can generally get them to raise it then swing around it and nail them, but doing that while also being out of range of the explosion is where I start to have significant problems. (Omens aren't so bad, actually, btw - sometimes they block the shots, but sometimes they don't, and being frigates, the explosion danger is low.)

Still, this feels like something that is both 1) doable with enough skill, practice, and patience and 2) boring, so, not a good thing. Sort of the old Tempest-solos-everything situation, just with more skill and less time (so, not *as* bad!).

I wonder about something like, I don't know, Electronic Warfare (not the skill, the general effect) some kind of effect against phase ships. Or perhaps if making omni shields turn a little faster as a baseline might be enough. For something like in that video (which, yeah, a very lopsided example) if the AI just balled up facing shields outward, that would pretty much neutralize this tactic. And if the solution that is to bring in additional ships the phase ship plays in support of, then - problem solved!

I bet they will be the best fighters ever and not because they have cool name(which they have of course, very cool name).

*thumbs up* (A little concerned they'll be OP on high-tech ships, but we'll see, I guess. It's the curse of support fighters - best on the opposite tech style.)

after going through the patch notes id like to make 2 small suggestions
 1_ wouldnt it make more sense for the cyclone reaper launcher to launch both torpedoes at the same time since theres 2 tubes? it would also change how you use them because right now the target ship can shoot down both at the same time with a well placed shot or just shoot down the second because of the delay but when they are shot together its more risky and rewarding

I think it'd be worse - both might get absorbed by the same shield-overloading hit, and they'd be more at risk to being taken out by area-of-effect flak. The spacing now is short enough that it doesn't give non-AoE PD much opportunity to switch targets, but long enough to avoid small AoE.
2_ i think the hammer barrage has too much spread even at close range you cant land more than 2 of the 4. maybe decrease that a little?

Hmm, that hasn't been my experience at all - not vs large ships, anyway. But more importantly: a certain amount of messy chaos is *extremely* intentional for that weapon!

also i remember a thread about medium ballistic weapons and how they dont synergize with each other after some of them changed(range and burst fire accuracy) is that left for the next update or did you forget about it?

Not sure what you mean.

Check this topic.
Then explain to Mr. Alex that because of colours, his posts are being 90% auto skip.
If you manage that, I'll fallow suit.  8)

Just stop, please. This rules-lawyering is not going to go anywhere, you were asked by a moderator to not do this.

i might be wrong but i think i saw a Lion Guard ship having energy bolt coherer.

Some of them do, yes. It has a modified effect on crewed ships, but still does boost non-beam energy range.

Thank you for the reports! Made some notes, will take a look.

Glad you got it sorted, at least :)

Fair points all-around, yeah. (Moved this to suggestions...)

Ahhh! My apologies, yeah, that's totally confusing, isn't it. The automatic memory allocation is turned off because unfortunately the code to restart the JVM (and apply the new memory parameter) doesn't work on a small but large-enough number of systems.

It might also be sensible to check for the zombie code that loads just this field out-of-line with the rest of the file and remove it.
Loading the (well, any) file should be an atomic operation - all or nothing - to prevent hard-to-understand behaviour like this and, if nothing else, the resulting false-positive bug reports.

I'll make a note; that is odd - at a quick look, I'm not sure how what you're seeing is even possible.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: February 03, 2023, 12:21:16 PM »
Not even hammers:
LP manticore running around with SO, cyclone and double HMG :)
Improved reaper looks nastier, with officer skipping racks is an option and there'll still be OP to spare.
Squall damage going up and that were the 2 things that looked far out of line when first reading the notes.

I'd say racks are entirely unnecessary - the odds of it surviving long enough to use even the base Cyclone ammo seem low!

Is the lp manticore's system still the cannister flak? It would be interesting to change that to burn drive for maximum in your face torpedo strikes! Probably objectively worse in terms of performance but also terrifying stacked on top of SO.

Tempting! Basically the Pather Venture, though, and I don't want to keep hitting the same note. Maybe Fast Missile Racks could be fun, alongside more DP, hmm.

As I'm in the camp that Fury seems to work Okay at 20 DP for me, I haven't been presented evidence that a buff is absolutely necessary.  However, something small on the scale of an OP bump like Grievous69 suggests or a universal mount addition like Foof suggests sounds reasonable to me and doesn't shake things up too much.  If the Medusa is getting a 5 OP bump at 12 DP, maybe the Fury should get a 10 OP bump at 20 DP.  A large buff like the Eagle got would be way too much I think.

Would you mind sharing a good build or two?

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: February 03, 2023, 11:12:49 AM »
I often encounter it because I give an order, tab out of the map (muscle memory), then realize I missed something and have to use another command point even though it has been less than a second or I never even unpaused. It is my main frustration with the CP mechanic.

Just made a note to take a look and maybe try it/see how it feels. (Erm: "it" being "not closing the comm frequency".)

add portraits that have moustaches so I can feel like a 18th century admiral and I will be happy.

:-|D  (the | is meant to be a moustache, if that's not clear.)

I would like more details about this.

And I would like to share more, but I'll restrain myself!

While Pirate Falcon is on the strongish side at 20 DP, if that level already needs a nerf Gryphon/Monitor/LP Brawler could definitely take a bit of a beating IMO.
(LP Brawler going up to 6 DP seems smallish but might be enough)

Honestly, the Gryphon and especially the Monitor could probably all stand to cost a little more DP. Not a huge amount, but some.

Radar? You mean that combat radar? But it's in the combat engine, not the campaign layer...
What I referred to is the UI like the left corner credits

There was a campaign one at some point. I'm not sure if it still exists.

I'm also looking forward to the lore expansion of the Luddic Church

(Then this is certainly the update for you!)

Ah, so shield upkeep is actually defined as fraction of flux dissipation, got it.

Yep! Ahh, your question makes sense now, since it's not presented like that to the player.

You've already got diminishing returns built into fighter spam with the new soft cap on skills and the Drover has been very far from good, so I don't feel like it's on the edge of overtaking the game again. It's definitely more powerful than the Condor, sure, but is it really 1.5 Condors?

Hmm, this gives me an idea for an angle to take on testing it - see how it does in a simular configuration, 2vs3. Of course not the end-all of tests and not reflective of many different uses, but may be interesting to see regardless. E.G. if all-interceptor builds on all sides result in Drovers winning somehow, that'd be a pretty solid (and surprising) indicator they *are*.

Oh wow I genuinely forgot Neutrino Detector exists after multiple experiences with how unreliable it is (no offense btw) so I don't bother bringing Violatiles anymore, guess I'll give it another try with an easily accessible supply for it, thanks guys  ;D

Haha! None taken :)

And I'll still keep saying Fury is overcosted, especially with AI that dies more often with it than with frigates. I don't see it getting stronger than it currently is so the only path to redemption is having its DP cost down to 18 or so.

I have a note to look at it again.

EDIT: I forgot to comment on the DP costs, wow I would've never guessed only 50 DP for a capital that seems so insane. 30 DP for Apex makes sense now that I looked back on the screenshot. It has a ton of firepower plus free PD with Terminator drones.

The Pegasus may well be undercosted; we'll see. It does tend to lose to the Paragon 1v1, depending on fit, anyway - and it only has mediums for non-missile firepower.

Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.

Ah! THat would explain how it didn't end up in the notes, I was confused for a minute :)

A likely unpopular opinion, but I wish the Fury never moved off its 15 DP cost and was balanced around that niche. High Tech needs its own Light Cruise and the Fury is well beyond the Falcon, in my book. Personally, there are too many 20 DP Cruisers out there vying for the same spot.
I'd prefer that over the current situation. Just make it cheaper and less tanky. Like you said, there's a spot for a cruiser that's not expensive. No need to try and make Aurora-lite.
Just looking at the distribution DP costs for ships which meet a hypothetical high tech doctrine: fast, maneuverability System, shield tank, primary energy weapons:

Shrike 8 DP
Medusa 12 DP
Hyperion 15 DP
Fury 20 DP or 15 DP
Aurora 30 DP
Odyssey 45 DP

I certainly think the Fury looks better at the 20 DP in that lineup, given you've already got the Medusa at 12 DP and the Hyperion at 15 DP.  I'd much rather see the Fury balanced at the 20 DP level as that looks like an easier to distinguish progression.   Dropping it to 15 DP means competing in the Medusa and Hyperion space, which would feel really overcrowded to be honest.  Then there's nothing in that doctrine between 15 DP to 30 DP, which feels like a pretty big gap.

There is also the problem that the Eagle and to a lesser extent the Falcon design kind of fight itself.  Fury's design actually works together (and synergizes strongly with safety overrides, but that's a separate point).  To get to 15 DP, you'd essentially have to make it barely stronger than a Medusa, and on par with the Hyperion, the latter of which is already a fast, shield tanking, 3 medium mount, maneuverability system using ship.  For example, Medusa and Hyperion already have 600 flux dissipation max, compared to the Falcon's 700, as well as 16,667 max effective shield capacity compared to the Falcon's  max capacity of 16,250.

Or in other words, the high tech doctrine simply uses high end destroyers and frigates to fill the light cruiser niche better than a midline light cruiser.  Keep in mind, non-beam energy weapons (the bread and butter of a Fury) don't get as much benefit from a Dedicated Targeting Core as a ballistics ship would, so I don't see a need for a 15 DP high tech doctrine ship in the cruiser format.  I'll also note, Heavy blasters will cover a multitude of sins in terms of making up for DPS with only a few mounts.  If people feel the Fury isn't worth DP, then I'd rather see it buffed than drop down to the DP range of two other already existing high tech doctrine ships.

Hmm. Lots of interesting thoughts here, thank you!

I am missing skill  update, will it come ?

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.

My question to Alex is if the maximum target leading is basic or s-mod/elite only?


Oh right I forgot to ask another thing, is the LP Manticore also 12 DP? Because that franky seems busted for a faction that's already harder than every other faction in the game (excluding exploration stuff ofc).

Yeah it's 12 DP. I mean, large missile slot, yes, but it's not a very tanky ship and it has built-in SO so it's kind of an awkward one. Though, yeah, Hammer Barrage plus a bunch of machine guns...

Maybe there are more cases of S-Mods that have become only good IF S-modded instead of being buffed to be worth using normally and the S-Mod being a pretty nice extra.
It could just be an outlier for all i know but better safe than sorry yes?

Shield shunt is very cheap so it's on a fairly short list of hullmods whose build-in effect is quite high (but still aligns with the base effect, either in stats or at least in spirit.)

Bug Reports & Support / Re: Memory leak on Linux? [0.95.1a]
« on: February 03, 2023, 09:01:37 AM »
Hmm, how strange! Is there an hs_err_pidXXXX.log file somewhere in the starsector folder, where the X's are a bunch of numbers? That should be generated if the game crashes in some specific ways. If that's present, seeing the contents might help point us in the right direction.

(I'm not sure if there's a Linux equivalent, but on Windows, I'd suggest looking at the Event Viewer to check for any errors around the time of the crash; that can also provide useful information.)

Suggestions / Re: Security Codes event aftermath bug
« on: February 02, 2023, 09:11:02 PM »
This is confusing to me - there's many other instances where "special" fleets (i.e., spawned via script as a result of player actions/side missions) - don't count as "official" representatives of their faction, and you can thus fight them at a reduced reputation penalty.

Didn't get a chance to answer earlier, but, this just depends on the type of fleet it is and where it is. Since this encounter is in the core worlds and with an official patrol of that faction, not some kind of mercenary, I think it makes sense for the standard rules to apply.

As to what you can do - maneuver to disengage, not get intercepted in the first place, not have the transponder on, possibly retreat (if the fleet is small and fast enough, etc). There are some options.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 1442