Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Planet Search Overhaul (07/13/24)

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.

Messages - eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29
1
It sounds like most of your issues with this come from Nex. If you enjoy exploring rather than doing lots of things in the core dealing with other empires, you should probably turn that mod off. It's just not meant for what you want to do and it causes problems.
It functions mostly as intended with Nex, although weird things like the League sending AI inspection or the Hegemony sending blockades can happen depending on who owns what. Likewise, some events never end if a faction loses all of its world to invasions, but the new owners don't send the crisis fleet(s) for one reason or another.

I could have sworn there was a way to directly turn the system off in the game files, but I don't remember what it is now.

The only current way in-game to "remove" the feature is to sat bomb into de-civilization every world with a military market that was originally owned by a vanilla faction. The exceptions being the League and possibly TT as they give up after 1 bombing, as well as Pirates and Pathers as they have to be fully wiped out.

2
General Discussion / Re: So about that new hidden cache
« on: June 14, 2024, 06:56:34 PM »
Quote
It tends towards long range ballistics so ships that rely on their shields tend to struggle with it.

That being said I have soloed it with a single Hyperion.

Yeah that sounds about right, I'm running quite a few midline cruisers this patch since the buffs, they all popped within seconds I was a little shocked, I wasn't really built for it but still, looked like a freebie and I was pleasantly surprised.
Yep, and they spam AI cores so their Eagle and Falcons will be faster than an unofficered Eagle/Falcon.

3
General Discussion / Re: So about that new hidden cache
« on: June 14, 2024, 05:20:23 PM »
Is that Sentinel fight supposed to be difficult? Looking at it it's a bunch of junk but somehow it's deleting my fleet in seconds and I'm not sure why. Haven't really gotten to an endgame fleet yet but my fleet is killing Ordos just fine.

I'm just curious about others experience with this one, it looks like a simple fight but somehow isn't.
It tends towards long range ballistics so ships that rely on their shields tend to struggle with it.

That being said I have soloed it with a single Hyperion.

4
General Discussion / Re: "Fearless" Automated ships
« on: June 14, 2024, 02:23:23 PM »
I've got Brilliant piloted by Beta-core. This ship was pretty chewed, below 50% HP. I've ordered it to perform orderly retreat, should have ordered it immediate retreat if I know. 5 seconds later AI decided that best course of action would be to RAM head on an Invictus(!!!). Rusult obvious -- my ship disintegrated with almost no effect on Invictus ;D.

P.S. Do automated ships without captain are also fearless or they are steady?
They are all fearless.

The AI doesn't respond to retreat commands right away, so it behaves as if it doesn't have an order. Give it a rally task force order down to the bottom of the map, and once it is out of range of the enemy, give it a direct retreat command. It almost always will start retreating properly when you do this.

The AI issue has been reported, but its direct cause hasn't been figured out as far as I know.

5
General Discussion / Re: unnecessary weapon tier list
« on: June 11, 2024, 02:03:22 PM »

I use Pulse Lasers all the time. The OP and flux decrease, hit strength, DPS , and range increase make it so I favor putting EMP damage elsewhere.


Can't think of any ship where I would want them over Ion Pulsers. Can you share any example?


More dps and efficiency than ion pulser. Also more range and 1 less op. You can get ion from the small energy slots. For hit and run though, ion pulser is better yeah.

500 vs 600 range isn't that different and with such short range it's better not to engage into flux efficiency battle and just unload everything you have and break away. Small ships like Wolf or Tempest can't handle those 240 flux/sec from a singe gun, and bigger ships that can extend it's range still would have much better options for flux damage/tank ratio (like phase lance or heavy blaster).  Don't know, I just can't see it

Not gonna argue about needlers cause i was completely disappointed in every kinetic/explosive guns since I discovered a high tech "in your face" bully loadouts :) They are very fun to pilot.
SD Nova. My current built makes use of 1 HIL, one Autopulse Laser, one Cryo Blaster, one Kinetic Blaster, one Pulse Laser, one IR AutoLance as I had a bit of OP but not enough flux, and four Pilums which is where I get my Ion damage from. The Pilums are required as they force the enemy to keep their shield up, even when the Nova is backing off, as well as screws with the enemy shield AI in general.
Alongside two support Herons that have a wing each of Claws it's more than enough EMP.

Other places I have used it are on Medusas. The sustained damage alongside a Phase Lance tends to be more effective than a Pulser. I also have used them on endurance Aurora builds, I.E. no limited ammo weapons or SO. However, I've never been able to find an endurance Aurora build that I'm satisfied with. They just have too little range, and their system tends to cause them to pull away from enemies too much even with aggressive AI.

As for frigates, the Hyperion, Brawler LG, and Tempest all have enough flux to mount at least 1 and are fast enough or have enough bonus range to actually make use of it. The Hyperion has enough room to mount other weapons alongside it, the Brawler LG barely has enough flux to mount a Phase Lance with it, and the Tempest would have to take an IR Autolance but has its drones for HE damage. That being said the Ion Pulser would in general be better as none of them can fight in a sustained manner, so a burst weapon will end up dealing more damage.

6
General Discussion / Re: unnecessary weapon tier list
« on: June 11, 2024, 09:52:51 AM »
Is this supposed to be satirical? I genuinely can't tell because some weapons are described and valued perfectly fine, but then with some I begin to question did you mix them up with something else, or are you just playing a heavily modded game.

Kinetic Blaster being in the best group while AMB being in the worst feels like bait.
KB is good when you have a lot of OP but are low on flux. It works best for support doctrine builds. KB 375 flux/s + a Phase Lance at 174 = 549flux/s vs a Heavy Blaster at 720flux/s. It comes at a cost of 22 OP vs 12, but in many cases that is worth it.

Storm Needler/Heavy Needler - it's a anti-shield shotgun with way too high flux use and short range. Range is too short for harrasing and flux usage too high for brawling - I don't understand this weapon and rather go for Hypervelocity Driver instead. Light needler is ok since it's role to overflux or scare off small ships, and it works ok on long-range escort Hammerheads with Heavy maulers.

Pulse Laser - does enyone use it? really? why? It's a medium slot weapon in a world where Ion Pulsers exist and do relatively same damage with chance to completely shut down enemy guns/engines.

PD Laser - useless. Yes, it is a pd weapon. No, it's still useless. Even on Donut. Even if you have nothing else to put in this slot.

IR Lance - God-tier  anti-fighter weapon. One Champion with 4 of IR Lances can turn every droneship on a battlefield into useless flying bricks. Absolutely evaporate any fighter on sight and, as a bonus, does good damage to hull.

Gravitune Beam/Tacticool Laser - does nothing but looks cool. Must have for a good rave party.

Burst PD Laser - the best small slot weapon in a game. Scarab with 5 burst pd + advanced optics + ustable injector is a monster comparable only with hyperion, in player hands can solo kill nearly any ship in game, struggles only against very good shields on big high tech/remnant cruisers or bigger ships, but any low tech ship is just a food for him. Really shines with elite PD skill. In AI hands is one of the best escort ships in a game, by far better then omen, and very decent flanking harasser. The only downside for Burst pd is you cannot tell it to prioritise fighters over missiles.
I use Pulse Lasers all the time. The OP and flux decrease, hit strength, DPS , and range increase make it so I favor putting EMP damage elsewhere.

Tactical Lasers with built in IPDAI make for some of the best support PD thanks to their range.

7
Suggestions / Re: Time to triple the fleet budget!
« on: June 10, 2024, 12:06:06 PM »
The fleet doctrine of your colonies is affected by the three main discrete sliders: Officer Count, Quality and Size. You can max out one or spread the points out across the three, either way you can't max out all three.

But why isn't it possible? The military is at the end of the day an extension of the economy, and why wouldn't a local polity invest in larger fleets, more & high quality officers and higher quality ships if it had the economic power to back it all up? Sindria certainly thinks so too if the lion guard is anything to go by.

What I've been thinking about is to keep the four free points you can assign to the slider, but also allow a sort of second set of points that cost credits to sustain. That way you could conceivably max out your fleet doctrine if you had the economy to pull that off.

Perhaps make it expensive to prevent players from abusing it early game, like say, 200k per extra point? Naturally a large colony with AI cores and an alpha core as its leader is gonna produce 400k at minimum, per month anyway, so it wouldn't be out of place for the player to be able to sustain such expenses at that point in game.

Welp, it's just a little though I had during a train ride. Thanks for reading that stray thought.
Currently you can get up to 8-12 Paragons per detachment with rarely one d-mod on them, assuming they're spawned from a max fleet size world. The only thing it's really missing is a bunch of high-level officers. Setting fleet size to max in the doctrine will only cause fleet quality to drop to 95% assuming the Heavy Industry has a Pristine Nanoforge and the world with the High Command has 10 stability. So, yea, 1 point in quality and the rest in officers for 5*200,000 = 1,000,000 credits.

I'm not sure I would ever bother paying that, as max size fleets are already good enough to handle anything Nex throughs at me, and there's no vanilla content that can handle a couple max strength worlds assuming there are Star Fortress and additional worlds with weaker HCs.
It may be worth using a scaling cost based on planet size. As its usefulness would be mainly in the early colony game, with late game HC fleets simply getting too large for the AI factions to handle.

8
Suggestions / Re: A bunch of issues and suggestions!
« on: June 09, 2024, 08:00:34 PM »
I would like more PD missiles. Having some small and medium stinger mine throwers, the missile the Wasp uses, would be wonderful. Likewise, a disposable DEM that follows the parent ship and uses multiple burst PD to kill off fighters and missiles would be really nice.
I'm thinking Casaba-Howitzer missiles. What if nuke, but also shotgun?
... I've pretty sure that is functionally what the Dragonfire is.

9
Suggestions / Re: A bunch of issues and suggestions!
« on: June 09, 2024, 11:33:51 AM »
Money is absolutely combat power.  If we remove the human's ability to outwit the AI from the equation, there isn't a fleet worth 2m with (full officers) that can beat a 100m (full officers), no matter what skills your character has selected. 
The most expensive ship you can get multiple of is the Invictus at 700,000 credits. The max fleet size for AI is 30. Meaning the max cost for fleets not including officers or s-mods is 21,000,000. Which is why money doesn't equal power as eventually you hit the ship limit. Likewise, a fleet with 30 Invictus is going to hit the fleet point mercy rule limit which means the player won't even be allowed to fight multiple of such fleets, especially not if their own fleet is only at 2 million.

There is a much more reasonable example that shows fleet power is not majorly determined by money, but instead by doctrine. At a ratio of 2.85m to 10.5m
A Hyperion has a base cost of 95,000. Times 30 = 2,850,000.
An Onslaught has a base cost of 350,000. Times 30 = 10,500,000.
The Hyperions will win with almost any build. The base costs were pulled from ship_data.csv in starsector/starsector-core/data/hulls.
Of course, the Hyperions are more expensive due to their increased supply consumption but are still drastically cheaper than an Onslaught.

Money plays a minor role in combat power as there are ships that counter specific doctrines. Likewise, all money-based combat power is limited to the 30 ship limit.

That's an interesting take on it.  Though I think that has more to do with missile range and alpha strike damage (and players skipping PD weapons) than anything else.  I think having ammo caps for missiles increases that safety override feeling.  I'd even go so far to say, I think if the ammo cap got removed, it'd force players to adapt to them, and both use more missiles and mount more PD and use more interceptors (that can shoot down missiles right?)  There's also an issue about firing them at point blank (As they become nearly uncounterable, so they'd need min range cap.  And the last one is is Reapers(and dragon breath) are almost too strong.  I feel like nearly every missile can have unlimiited ammo except reapers and dragon breath.  I'd also like to see explosive missiles get an damage radius,which'll cause a chain reaction across other missiles if too many are used on one target.  Throw all those ideas in the pot and see what comes out. 
You trade endurance firepower and DPS in return for extreme alpha damage and decent range. With SO you trade endurance and range for extreme sustained firepower and speed.
They function on the same principle. Give up the late battle to kill the enemy now. Which is why I draw the connection between the two.

Most missiles have a safety distance that makes them bounce harmlessly off of hulls at extremely close range. It's been a re-occurring annoyance of mine when I lose a reaper because I was too close. So, the unstoppable distance is very small as it's between the minimum arming range and successful PD defense range.

Most missiles have such a high burst damage and range, that even with lowered DPS and costing energy to fire, they would still be OP. DEMs however would be fine to have an unlimited amount of as they deal softflux.

While I wouldn't like explosive missiles to chain react, it's not realistic depending on explosive type and would invalidate certain missile systems, I would like more PD missiles. Having some small and medium stinger mine throwers, the missile the Wasp uses, would be wonderful. Likewise, a disposable DEM that follows the parent ship and uses multiple burst PD to kill off fighters and missiles would be really nice.

10
Suggestions / Re: A bunch of issues and suggestions!
« on: June 06, 2024, 08:28:02 AM »
Spoiler
Performance reasons firstly. Secondly congestion reasons, the battle map is too small for a 48 vs 48 fleet, which will break the AI. Thirdly fuel efficiency issues, frigates tend not to be very fuel efficient, and at 48 + cargo ship costs, you'll be struggling to find enough fuel as the ingame economy wasn't structured around supporting more than 30 ships.

Guess vids of people fighting with modded 600 deployment fleets 100 ship fleet battles without issue were just photoshops then. 

Quote
Tends to be that way already. You can't just get a 240 DP fleet with capitals, supply it, and arm it at level 1, unless you've been playing purely the economy game.
At which point you'll tend to level a few times just from trade XP and defensive combat XP.

You skipped right past the issue I want to bring up said "But there is no Genie" to the clearly theoretical. The issue is we're missing out on a more satisfying growth curve of character and fleet progression.  New games consist of a momentary dash to the game's max deployment cap and then futzing around. That really doesn't translate well into the feel of power progression. That may work for Nex where you wage war using your monitary gains, but Nex is a mod.     

Quote
It doesn't, you get bonus XP back when you s-mod a frigate. You have to do stuff to get that bonus XP back, but it doesn't take anywhere near as long as getting 144 story points.

Yes, someone else clued me in on that. It needs more UI to clarify that the story points are recycled back to you quicker when S-moding smaller ships.  More than it has. 

Quote
S-modded frigates are cheap enough to restore at a station, whereas capitals typically are too expensive to restore. If it took longer for capitals to be restored with hull restoration, the skill would lose a good chunk of its utility.

Waiting longer than one month for a dmod fix on the ziggerot is too long it for you?  The skill is a bit broken in my eyes.  When the Ziggerat gets a d-mod fixed, it's worth near 700k.  What other skill gifts you millions during the course of play? 
You bring up on capitals taking longer to is an issue? You avoid the issue that a tiny frigate is forced to take just as long as a capital.  Unfairly punishing wolfpack fleets.  Clearing a dmod off 40dp of frigates can take a year.  A capital? No problem, one month!  Even though it's the same DP.  I'd like to see is a little fairer distribution. 

Like 100k/month in dmods fixed?  That can cover several frigates per month fixed, or see a single dmod from a cap cleared every 2-3 months. And the zig takes an appropriate few years to fix up if trashed. 

Quote
Because you can't easily start the game with colonies. Can you imagine how much it would suck to reach the late game and realize you never found farming or heavy industry?
Almost all ships in the game can be obtained through other means than your own production, colony systems can't.

Just like Integrated Targeting Computer hull mod never shows up right?  It's not terribly hard to think of ways to guaranty you find them. Like how you always get that quest to return the alpha core? Or go to the red planet?

Quote
You can't have a level 8 officer under your command. The max is 7. They stay under your command because you saved them from cryosleep, and you're paying them. Running out of cash is one of the few ways to get a true game over. If someone bankrupts themselves paying for an officer they don't need, then that isn't even a skill issue, it's just a common sense one.

8 max lvl officers means that there are 8 officers, each of which are max lvl. Cryosleep and money?  That head cannon is uninspiring. 
That's not a "true game over". It's a design issue newbies are the ones to suffer the most from, and I'd like to see the game become more popular.   

Quote
Tactical Drills * 11 officers = 55% increase in combat damage across the board. Put all the officers in Kites, and grab Support Doctrine. Your fleet is now completely broken and will kill anything and everything. Fleet wide skills need to be applied once or they scale out of control.

That's exactly not how it'd scale.  Keep the cap fixed at 5%, and extra officers with the skill increase the command points where the soft cap kicks in. Multiple officers with the skill increases the threshold before degradation. 
And let me snip your next thought in the bud.  Yes this suggestion necessitate balancing how much each officer skill and the player skill contributes to that command point softcap. 

Quote
Because it's an insane skill at the end of a combat ineffective tree. You gimp your fleet combat performance which would keep them alive, in return for making it cost less when they die.
 

It's the strongest combat tree as it lets you gain monetary funds faster.  I'm pretty confident in saying that having your character have elite Energy Weapons is weaker than more funds every month for the entire game. 
And I'll jump on the end game argument here too.  When money stops mattering, you can spend one skill point to respec out.   

Quote
Low-tech firepower and combat endurance per supplies far surpasses either midline or high-tech, with high-tech in general having the worst performance in terms of supplies. The exception is the Paragon, but the Paragon in terms of performance more closely relates to midline or low tech than it does to high tech.

Yep, I said it felt like there at one time was a balance.  ... But it doesn't pan out anymore.  It's like monthly cost of crew got turned up, which punishes low tech so much more, and mid and high tech weren't adjusted.  A rough guess it feels like changing supplies to cost 200 per will bring them in balance. 

Quote
20% speed and is unnoticeable... Really? ECM is either unnoticeable or very noticeable depending on your fleet and the enemy's fleet.

Pretty much.  Well 20% is just starting to be noticed.  I'm not watching a speed gage in combat. Also, it's a boring bonus.  I am watching ships combat. For those bonuses to be interesting, they need to be visual impactful on top of mentally engaging. 

Quote
A mixture of AI issues that will be fixed, and AI unfortunate necessities. Get some escort frigates, order them to kill the Gremlin, and order the remainder of your fleet to engage the enemy.

The issue is that the Gremlin is the entirety of the enemy forces until more show from under fog of war. 
If this was Starcraft, and the instant an enemy poked it's head into your fog of war every single combat unit rushed towards it to kill it, would that be a bug?  (hint:yes)  Especially when you consider that if you manually put a engage order on it only 1 ship gets the order. 

Quote
It's swapping targets as the new target is "flanking it". It's desirable behavior in some contexts. Give any ship that uses weapons like the Tachyon Lance, a reckless officer. You'll have to manage their movements, but they will remain on target and not care about flankers.
There's an AI game mod that addresses some of these issues, and Alex is aware that the current behavior can be less than ideal at times.

It does hurt.  And I'm hoping he visits it soon.

Quote
They're more useful as a stopgap until you know for certain what officers skills you want. A level 5+ officer is always useful, a reckless level 1 officer is rarely useful. 

It also deprives the player from the experience of lvling officers.  My current game I've picked skills for 2 officers.  Everything else is found.  Also 3 lvl 7s.  Feels bad. 
A Reckless lvl 1 with a skill you want is the gem you are looking for when building SO fleets. Just got to train them right. 

Quote
As combat speed functions based on how many frames a second you are getting. If you increase combat speed, but are getting sub-optimal fps, certain things will start to break down. Most notably weapon reloading. So, it's an option that you can change in the game files, for those that know what they are doing. It's also entirely unnecessary if you're flying a faster fleet.

Wait wait wait.  This game ties gameplay frames to graphic frames?  They aren't independent? alex. Alex.  ALEX.  Let me introduce you to the glory that is decoupling the gameplay update loop from the graphic loop!

Hard code the gameplay update() loop to occur no more than 20 times a second.  Then always pass .05s deltaTime to gameplay Update(). Always a static .05 seconds.  No variable times passed into gameplay loop ever. 
Apply simple prediction in the graphics Update(), but let it run at full FPS, taking variable deltaTime from last frame. 

Last, and after the rest is working, move gameplay update to an independent thread on a different core. 

It both solves all those pesky runspeed issues from the family of bugs just mentioned.  And lets systems with beasts under the hood hit that magically smooth 200 fps. 

I can see why people are saying gameplay issues for increased ship counts... 
 
Quote
"Adding a repeatable way to further acquire omega weapons."
They're OP and will supplant all other weapons in the game. Having just a few to fill voids in weapon doctrines is preferable.

Ssshhh.  This is a disguised ask for more end game content.  I never said an easy way!  I just don't want to cheat or mod the game for more. Also, I'm surprised that now you're on the side of limiting gameplay.     

Quote
"Changing the Eagle (falcon too?) so some of the ballistic turrets are composite. I think this goes a long way to fixes the issue where the ship has too many turrets for it's flux capability. "

Most ships can't fully fill out their weapon slots while remaining in flux and OP restraints. There's a reason why the pirate Falcon is 20DP, so no to the composite change.

Pirate falcon swaps all it's medium slots to missiles, as well as the ship mod.  20 is reasonable ask. It's basically an alphastrike variant Gryphon.  it was 14? back in the day. Anyways, what I'm suggesting is a far cry from that total conversion.  It's won't turn the Eagle into a mythical beast. What it does is greatly increase the variety of eagle builds, allowing more strategy uses for them.  Auroras are 50% synergy slots for the flex.  Feels like the tiniest missile flex adds interesting options in an otherwlse lackluster ship.   

Isn't it the the first cruiser most newbies strive to get because rule of cool?  It should feel good to use too.
[close]
They have issues with both raw FPS performance when compared to the base game, and most importantly RAM allocation. Modding has a bad tendency for eating up a massive quantity of RAM, as well as introducing memory leaks. Increasing fleet size to significantly larger sizes tends to eat up a lot more memory as well, resulting in some large DP and long fleet battles reliably preventing saving the game after they are concluded.
Likewise, you have the AI issue. The map is only so large, so if you capital spam, you can form a line across the map. Frigates, destroyers, and cruisers can't approach or flank this line so they just get pushed back, this causes the enemy to get too congested to fire reliably, and results in the player steamrolling the enemy. The same is conversely true for the player.
While you won't see it as much with a DP limit of 240, you will still see it if you spam Wolfs. Hell, you can see it with putting officers on low DP frigates and running support doctrine under normal settings.
I know all of this because it is how I originally played the game.

You have to be intentionally trying not to have a growth curve to not have a growth curve.
Most more difficult to acquire ships and weapons are already locked behind either fleet commissions with a cooperative relation, or reaching a high level and getting high level pirate contacts to buy the ships you need.
Tacking on a secondary system that restricts arbitrarily based on level how many ships you can have, or how many you can deploy when the player is already restricted by credits, resources, hull state, and weapon loadouts would be absolutely obnoxious.
If a level one player is lucky enough to find an Odyssey drifting in hyperspace and has the resources and weapons to use it, he should be able to deploy it with his main fleet without any extra catches.

K.

Yes, it's too long, it's one d-mod from your fleet per month, meaning if you lose five ships in combat and they each get two d-mods, you're looking at ten months of repair. If you stretch capital repair time out to say 4 months, and you lose two capitals each getting two d-mods each, you're looking at 16 months of repair + the time it takes for other ships to repair.
As for which skills provide the same volume of credits, literally all of the fleet wide combat skills, and officer skills. You don't have to pay for repairs if your ships never die to begin with.
Likewise, because your fleet wasn't gimped by the industry tree, you now fight higher level contact bounties, which in some cases can push into the 1,000,000 credit range.

ITU is present in many npc fleets, which means you can get the hullmod purely by hunting bounties. It's everywhere and there's no way you'll never not run into it.
Neither the Alpha core nor the red planet are required for seeing the full colony content. You'll likely find multiple AI cores in some research station or planetary ruins if you want to see the Hegemony event, and the shield does functionally nothing outside of modding content like Nex. Furthermore, to make industries fully effective requires the use of cores and colony items, meaning the scavenger hunt already exists, and adding more to it would make it obnoxious.

Ah, I see. If you magickly find 8 level 5-7 officers at a low level, and can use them on a ship each, you've gone out of your way to achieve that end. If you then bankrupt yourself after going to such lengths, well it's still a common sense issue.
Most officers come from being hired and trained, as such by the time you hit multiple max level officers the player should at least be on the higher end of their levels.

Just raising the soft cap won't work thanks to your earlier suggestion. Your officers and officer levels are limited by your level. Your fleet wide skills are limited by your level and your officers skills. So, at the beginning your fleetwide skills will be functionally worthless. Likewise, if at max level you get the full 240 DP, the officer fleetwide skills become worthless meaning the officer has to be replaced, and if they don't that officer has lost a much more valuable combat skill in return for what we already have. If your intention of getting around this problem is to let officers level higher so they can get more skills then that will require a rework of the XP system for officers, fleet points calculations, and will introduce yet another variable that makes NPC suboptimal when their officers don't all have fleet skills.
All this change achieves is occasionally screwing low level players, in return for exceptionally more complexity for both the player and dev.
None of this even touches on the issue of distribution with 11+ officers.

Money != combat power. It helps you get the ships and weapons you need, but player and officer skills ultimately determine the power of a fleet.
Going with industry in the early game is fine, but swapping your skills out of industry will always result in a net power gain mid to late game. At mid to late game, money starts being irrelevant making the entire industry tree irrelevant.
Even for early game, you don't have to pay hundreds of thousands of credits if your ships don't die in the first place.

While it's harder to travel, it's net cheaper to run a low tech fleet even with crew costs factored in.

20% is the difference between certain frigates like the TT/Brawler being worthless late game, to being one of the best options for it. Having frigates be able to viable engage and survive fighting cruisers and capitals is visually impactful and mentally engaging. You don't realize this because you plan around losing everything, which is why you're stuck thinking industry and HR is the best.

They literally do this in Starcraft, unless you're talking about SC2. The sheer volume of Corsairs I have lost or have seen lost because they chased a Mutalisk across the map is insane.
Neither AI in either game has units with any degree of self preservation, whereas Starsector AI absolutely does. Use rally task force to move your fleet where you want it to go when it's getting distracted by a frigate, and order a frigate to eliminate that distracting frigate.

Once the AI mod is all worked out, he'll probably take a look at it and implement what he thinks fits.

Almost all officers obtained by rescuing them have less than ideal skill setups. Most of the time when a player's fleet is well built enough, they will be replaced with level 1 officers that the player will train to be custom tailored for the ship they are piloting.

Yes and no. From my understanding the gameplay loop won't accelerate or bug out with high FPS, and it won't bug out with low FPS if the game speed hasn't been messed with. It's only when you manually double the game speed but are still getting low FPS that the issues start to appear. There have been multiple threads about it.

The balance of this game has always revolved around the AI and the player having the same tools, and the player overcoming the AI through their own intelligence. Adding restrictions that largely only effect the player, or adding broken weapons that the AI can't compete against ruins that balance.

Missiles are functionally Safety Overrides. Adding more missile slots to an already well-balanced ship dramatically increases its power in the short term. Which unless you're trying to kill multiple Ordos, is always a benefit. The Eagle is currently worth its DP, matching the Apogee performance nicely and only being slightly outperformed by certain Eradicator loadouts which is a consequence of the Eradicators 2 DP advantage and that its system is genuinely busted when paired with System Expertise. All of which far outcompete the Fury.
The Eagle is an endurance fighter, its usefulness derives from the fact that it does not require missiles to function, is fast enough with the use of its system to escape most similar sized or larger threats, and has enough firepower to dissuade smaller threats. If you give it composites, you're increasing its effectiveness in an area it's not built for, and by necessity will be increasing its cost. Even if you give it composites most players will stick to outfitting it the same way as few people will want to spend the op and an officer skill to increase its missile volume, and it will get significantly less use due to its increase in price.
For reference for each slot that gets switched over to a composite mount, the DP would likely have to increase by two.

11
Suggestions / Re: A bunch of issues and suggestions!
« on: June 05, 2024, 06:50:47 PM »
Spoiler
I've been playing since .95, and I enjoy this game quite a bit.  So thanks! 
 
So I want to throw a wall of text of ideas here. Perhaps one of them will inspire something. 

Issues

Let me start with areas that bother me as a player. I'm going to phrase them as a question so it sounds nicer.   

Why is the player's fleet is limited by number of ships, but that limit does not account for size of each ship?  There are fleet skills like wolfpack tactics, and I really want to build a 240 point mono-wolf fleet, but I can't actually field 48 ships + support. 
 
Why can I field a massive 240 dp fleet at level 1?  It makes me feel like player levels don't matter.  If I find a capital ship at low level, it should good to get enough Command Points to start using it.  It really helps feeling growth as a fleet commander if I actually grow into how many ships I can command. 

Why does it take the same amount of story points to S-mod a frigate as it does a capital?  I'd like to S-mod said wolf fleet in a reasonable amount of time.  144 story points for 48 ships is a lot more than the 24 it takes to S-mod out a fleet of 8 with multiple capital/cruiser, and a few choice frigates/destroyers. 
 
Why does it take the same amount of time for a d-mod on a frigate to be repaired as a captial ship with the Hull restoration skill?  Capitals are bigger!  Should take a longer time to fix the broken hull! 

Why do I start the game with complete knowledge of building out colonies?  I need blueprints for complex inner working of ships, but the heavy industry needed to build said ship?  Yeah, I can just wing it. 

Why can I have 8 max lvl officers under my command when I am a totally unknown and newbie lvl 1 commander?  Gating by level also helps newbie's early and mid game cash flow out, as officers are the largest expense at this time.   
 
Why are officers limited to ship oriented skills?  There's a large untapped potential of fleet wide skills!  Most of those skills already have a softcap, so Officers could take the skill and have it increase the softcap.  This gives new growth paths for an armchair admiral. Or for a skilled ship player that needs a little bit more fleet skill. You can always have the player version of said skill apply higher caps.  Also, then these skills can go elite( increases the softcap more).  Plus it feels like a better use of officers than just sticking them in random frigates of a wolfpack. 

Why is the only way to remove d-mods without paying for them a top tier industry skill.  On capital ships, each of those mods cost 200k-700k each to fix, so it seems like a monthly "Here's an extra 500k of repairs for free per month".  A bit to strong of a skill I think, to get that much per month.  Thinking about it though, this issue goes away if officers are allowed to have fleet skills.  Which means you only need one of your officers be your engineer that repairs the fleet.

Why is fixing 1-2 dmods at port more expensive than buying a new ship with no d-mods of the same class? 

Why are lowtech fleets more expensive to operate than mid or hightech?  There's more than a 50% penalty in increased crew and fuel consuption for lowtech, and that seems out of place.  Like there was intent for balanced between low, mid and high having increased supply cost for mid and high tech fleets, but that intent got left by the wayside and only lowtech penalty exists now.  An Onslaught takes 750 crew (18.75 crew per DP) and a Paragon takes 400 crew (6.66 crew per DP).  It's like monthly crew costs got doubled or tripled, but low the generic tech skeleton crews never got reduced to keep in balance. 
 
Why is ECM rating and Nav rating effects in combat almost unnoticeable?  I know it's there, and does stuff, but it's not apparent and I don't care about them. That seems wrong. 

Why does the AI have ADHD?  Here I am, a paragon, I need to engage that approaching onslaught, OOOH A FIGHTER, StOp TURN, RAISE SHIELDS.  MUst kill fighter, Must kill momemtem forward Fire all weapons. ... Oh, incoming projectiles, shield up..  Eh, it's been 3 seconds since something hit my shields.  Time to drop shields. (Projectile impact on hull sounds). ...  I'm a paragon, under heavy fire. Fortress shield. Half second is good enough.  Let's shoot some guns (2 shots from auto pulse) That's good enough, Fortress shield! cancel fire 1 shot, Fortress shield, Cancel, fire 1 shots.  ...   Hey it's the start of combat. On a new battle field.  There's 240 dp of ships incoming.  I'm going to search forward, WAIT A GREMLIN, Attention entire fleet, FIRE ALL WEAPONS. USE EVERY MISSILE, EVERYONE CHASE AND ENGAGE IT, WE MUST ATTACK LIKE IT THE EXTERMINATE ORDER TO EVERYONE IN THE FLEET. 

Why does the AI not consider sight lines of other ships?  Destroyer "I've found a great spot to shoot from, it's the space right between our capital ship and the enemy station" ...   

Why does AI ship rotation not account for turrets firing on a target?  I know a tachyon lance has slow rotation, but it's really frustrating when a tachyon lance rakes across the hull and out to space doing almost nothing because the ship decided to turn to a new target the instant after it started firing.   

Why are all the officers found in space rank 5 or higher?  I think it'd be more engaging to find them at a random lvl 1-5.   

Why is there no way to increase how fast time passes in combat.  I know there's a mod for it, but this is one of those QoL for new players that I think matter. 

Suggestion List

Please consider: 
 
Changing fleet cap from number of ships to Command Points based on your level. This also gives a hook for other design systems to tie in.  For example,  officer levels can increase the total command points allowed in the fleet and Civilian ships can require less.  Also, some sort of soft cap here might be needed. Like max challenge rating reduced for every X you go over, and people start leaving (with your ships) when you visit port. 

Changing officers cap to combined levels of officers instead of just number of officers.  If this is combined with level progression it'll further enhance the feeling that your a rising star a commander.  Also, if how many officers is capped by combined level, then you have every ship in your wolfpack have a low level officer.     

Letting officers take fleet oriented skills.  Like Hull Restoration or Wolfpack Tacktics. Or have a new kind of officer that can pick fleet skills?  Given that most fleet skills have a soft cap on quantity, officers with the skill just increases the cap!  With elite versions increasing it more.  I expect doing this means nerfing the soft cap the player's character has, but I think using officers to go beyond the current softcap is a bonus that outweighs it. 

Scaling S-mod story point cost based on hull size. Likewise, scaling D-mod repair time on ship hull size.  This will definitely necessitate getting more story points per level, (or using decimals) which means revisiting how many story points are used for quest events through all the scripts. Though this does open up using smaller story points to escape a fight based on CP.   

Letting us have an alternate, non-monetary, way to fix d-mods. As a player I feel too dependent on Hull Restoration. It's like having a 200k/m bonus money. The previous suggestion to let officers have fleet skills solves it.  Or perhaps fixing 1 dmod fixed every x months? 

Having repairs at port take time.  That feels thematic, and can add pressure if you need to get somewhere fast. 

Having salvaging a debris field take time. I'm imagining hold down the salvage button while a nice slurping sound effect plays with the appearance of little people sweeping the debris field. And the items you get can just can pop up as text. 

Not costing extra supplies if over cargo capacity when not moving.  (pairs well with the above). 

Having salvage fleets salvaging fields in systems where a high number of combats are taking place.  Gives you something to compete with. 

Finding blueprints for colony industries.  Perhaps start the game with mining, farming, waystation, spaceport, and tech mining, then find the others as you explore/do quests. 

Generating a quest to return an officer found in a cryopod to a core world if I don't have a spot in my officer pool.  Just to lessen the blow of finding an officer and not being able to use it.  Perhaps they can stay at that core world for a year or two as an officer for hire if I change my mind. 

Adding a repeatable way to further acquire omega weapons. 

Changing the AI for phase ships so that it doesn't use phase to travel faster unless it can maintain a phase speed faster than non-flux speed speed bonus.  I'm looking at you, Grendal.   

Creating new AI based hullmods.  More specifically, hullmods that cost 0 OP and changes how the AI acts in combat. Here are a few examples:  "Auto retreat order at 40% hull or combat readiness".  "Ram enemy ships".  "Target incoming fighters and missiles".  "Don't shoot point defense at ships".  "Send Fighters after smaller ships".  "Prioritize guarding frontline ships with fighters".  "Avoid being in any enemy gun range"(Please, so I don't have to micro carrier position while a carrier is escorting someone).   "Prioritize smaller ships".  Things like this.     

Allowing us to designate timid to reckless on a ship as part of ship loadout. Don't you think it's wildly unintuitive to have the slider not just be fleet wide, but faction wide and buried in the faction fleet manager?  Yes, it's interesting to have officers with those style differences, and that officers flavor is nice to keep.  Perhaps bonuses if the officer and the ship match?   

Allowing us (and AI) to use different ship formations when entering combat.  Like "Two columns", "Three columns", "Larger sizes in front"  "Larger ships in back" 

Adding more ship designs and hulls to the ship simulator and allowing multiple of the same kind to be deployed. (Including ships in your fleet, and the current design you are testing). 

Having Light and Heavy mortar ship weapons have a small AoE.  Like the Devastator cannon or flack.  But smaller.  Super on theme! 

Changing the Eagle (falcon too?) so some of the ballistic turrets are composite. I think this goes a long way to fixes the issue where the ship has too many turrets for it's flux capability. 

Changing the Apogee so it has a turret capable of forward point defense.

Adding some or all of these ship ideas:  Pirate Champion - with a large ballistic turret instead.  A high tech combat carrier (cruiser size).  A destroyer with large missile slot without builtin SO.  Maybe a variant of the Sunder?  A variant of the Eagle that straight up swaps the energy and ballistic medium locations (I thought this was what the LG version was going to be).   An LP version of the Gemini (this terrifies me).   

Adding a "Heavy Assault Gun" medium slot explosive damage weapon.  Why have a Light Assault Gun if there's no heavy one?  Or maybe the reverse.  Remove the Light Assault gun and up the explosive damage of the mortars. 

Further differentiating between the small and medium Burst PD laser.  It's basically the same item. 

Changing the Conquest built in hullmod. I had an idea. Instead of the generic point reduction for heavy ballistics, have a new hull mod that reduces the OP cost in half for a ballistic weapon if it matches the what's in the mirror turret on the other side of the ship.  Then, thrown in a penalty that prevents both turrets from firing at the same time.  This gives the conquest the very interesting and unique ability to rotate to present a new armor face while still having the same weapon loadout.  I very much want to build a symmetric conquest. 

Adding a new type of fighter bay.  A "Drone Bay".  Convert the Tempest, Apex, Venture and Mudskipper to use it.  Add a few more drone slots on more ships or make few ships.  Have the "Termination Sequence" ship power usable on any drone, with varying effects. Mining drones pop and do flack damage like a flack cannon?  Add a couple new drone types.   Use pentagons for the drone slots instead of squares!
[close]

Performance reasons firstly. Secondly congestion reasons, the battle map is too small for a 48 vs 48 fleet, which will break the AI. Thirdly fuel efficiency issues, frigates tend not to be very fuel efficient, and at 48 + cargo ship costs, you'll be struggling to find enough fuel as the ingame economy wasn't structured around supporting more than 30 ships.

Tends to be that way already. You can't just get a 240 DP fleet with capitals, supply it, and arm it at level 1, unless you've been playing purely the economy game.
At which point you'll tend to level a few times just from trade XP and defensive combat XP.

It doesn't, you get bonus XP back when you s-mod a frigate. You have to do stuff to get that bonus XP back, but it doesn't take anywhere near as long as getting 144 story points.

S-modded frigates are cheap enough to restore at a station, whereas capitals typically are too expensive to restore. If it took longer for capitals to be restored with hull restoration, the skill would lose a good chunk of its utility.

Because you can't easily start the game with colonies. Can you imagine how much it would suck to reach the late game and realize you never found farming or heavy industry?
Almost all ships in the game can be obtained through other means than your own production, colony systems can't.

You can't have a level 8 officer under your command. The max is 7. They stay under your command because you saved them from cryosleep, and you're paying them. Running out of cash is one of the few ways to get a true game over. If someone bankrupts themselves paying for an officer they don't need, then that isn't even a skill issue, it's just a common sense one.

Tactical Drills * 11 officers = 55% increase in combat damage across the board. Put all the officers in Kites, and grab Support Doctrine. Your fleet is now completely broken and will kill anything and everything. Fleet wide skills need to be applied once or they scale out of control.

Because it's an insane skill at the end of a combat ineffective tree. You gimp your fleet combat performance which would keep them alive, in return for making it cost less when they die.

Low-tech firepower and combat endurance per supplies far surpasses either midline or high-tech, with high-tech in general having the worst performance in terms of supplies. The exception is the Paragon, but the Paragon in terms of performance more closely relates to midline or low tech than it does to high tech.

20% speed and is unnoticeable... Really? ECM is either unnoticeable or very noticeable depending on your fleet and the enemy's fleet.

A mixture of AI issues that will be fixed, and AI unfortunate necessities. Get some escort frigates, order them to kill the Gremlin, and order the remainder of your fleet to engage the enemy.

They're supposed to consider sight lines, certain aggressive behavioral presets, such as those when fighting stations, or when an enemy is nearly overloaded, seem to override this behavior. I'm pretty sure I've already seen a suggestion and bug report for this behavior, I can't remember what the answer was.

It's swapping targets as the new target is "flanking it". It's desirable behavior in some contexts. Give any ship that uses weapons like the Tachyon Lance, a reckless officer. You'll have to manage their movements, but they will remain on target and not care about flankers.
There's an AI game mod that addresses some of these issues, and Alex is aware that the current behavior can be less than ideal at times.

They're more useful as a stopgap until you know for certain what officers skills you want. A level 5+ officer is always useful, a reckless level 1 officer is rarely useful.

As combat speed functions based on how many frames a second you are getting. If you increase combat speed, but are getting sub-optimal fps, certain things will start to break down. Most notably weapon reloading. So, it's an option that you can change in the game files, for those that know what they are doing. It's also entirely unnecessary if you're flying a faster fleet.

"Adding a repeatable way to further acquire omega weapons."
They're OP and will supplant all other weapons in the game. Having just a few to fill voids in weapon doctrines is preferable.

"Changing the Eagle (falcon too?) so some of the ballistic turrets are composite. I think this goes a long way to fixes the issue where the ship has too many turrets for it's flux capability.
"
Most ships can't fully fill out their weapon slots while remaining in flux and OP restraints. There's a reason why the pirate Falcon is 20DP, so no to the composite change.


Yes, I read through the entire thread and am repeating some things that have already been said. No, I'm not going to comment on the wall of text comments. I didn't comment on some of your suggestions because it would take me too long to do so.

12
(PTSD flashbacks for the days when thunders had harpoons intensify)
That honestly wouldn't be too much of an issue if they weren't regenerating due to the Thunders weak kinetic damage. Even minor PD can handle a couple harpoons without issue.

As it currently stands, the only fighter that I consider being not underpowered is the Flash Bomber. The Flash is only useful against slow targets in slow compositions thanks to its hilariously bad tendency to bomb its mother carrier and allies due to being too loose in how careful it is to avoid friendly fire.

My only real problems with fighting fighters stems from the AI trying to "avoid" fighters when it gets overwhelmed and as such ignores orders. It takes like 6 wings worth of Broadswords and Talons to kill a well built TT/Brawler but there's nothing you can do about it because it will even ignore retreat orders. Direct retreat still works but then it dies thanks to not turning to shield its ass.
Likewise, my other problem is that fighters can go over top of ships. This isn't too much of an issue with anything besides dumb fire or shielded bombers, as those two will either get overloaded or hold fire until they are on top of the ship they are targeting. At which point the ship's PD, and PD of escorts can no longer hit the fighters, and if the ship does not have 360 shields, the bomber will cause unstoppable damage.

The second reason is of course another reason I'm pushing for a fast destroyer escort with a large turreted energy mount. It doesn't matter if the fighters are on top of the ship as the Paladin can still hit them.

13
I would believe you, but I have 20 thousand images of my entire fighter fleet getting annihilated by a few Devastator salvos...
Devastator != Flak Cannon. Flak Cannon == Flak Cannon.

14
There are two things to winning: killing enemy and not dying. Heron is good at both but exceptional at not dying.
sry, I can't hear you over the sound of all your fighters dying to a single flak cannon
No, you're mixing it up. It's the bombers that are dying to a single flak cannon, a *fighter* Heron can get through flak perfectly fine.
show me ur build...
Warthog/Broadswords are tanky enough and with flares this makes minor flak relatively worthless. Will they die, yes, but slowly enough that the Heron can replace them. Thunders are fast enough that a good chunk of flak shots will just miss, and when combined with their EMP and kinetic damage, eventually they will chain disable PD.

15
It'd pretty much have to be slow IMO, otherwise you get too much range + speed.
Yep, that's another reason why I suggested making a standard speed HT destroyer with no movement system. Its range isn't that great unless it's escorting a capital with escort package, and its speed isn't enough to just flat out kill everything smaller than it.
Cheap enough that it can be reasonably used to escort Fury's or Auroras, while still being fast enough to keep up with Novas and the rare low PD Odyssey build.

Keep in mind a middling speed 60 cruiser that can function in a PD escort role already exists, and it's called the Champion. While its turret arc isn't great, putting a Locust in its large missile turret more than makes up for this weakness.
Likewise at 80 speed you have the Manticore which can mount a Devastator for PD duties.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29