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 - Dragon239

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
31
Mods / Re: [0.9a] Shadowyards Reconstruction Authority 0.7.0.1rc2
« on: November 21, 2018, 10:33:40 AM »
I don't think the Medical Center is actually increasing Pop Growth.



Mine says it should be giving me +50 Pop Growth, but I ain't seeing it. Is it related to how it doesn't export, or show up at the right side under "Commodities"?
By the way, did this mod add High-Cap Storage? What's it do?

Also, kinda unrelated but: Is there a way to see Global Market Info of a commodity without being at a colony screen of a colony that requires it in some way? I have no idea what the market value of Cloned Organs even is, given it doesn't show up at the moment.

32
Suggestions / Re: My lodse Feedback & Thoughts re 0.9a
« on: November 21, 2018, 07:57:59 AM »
Ah, the star type does matter? Cool. I've vaguely suspected that, but wasn't entirely sure. Hard to tell without keeping a specific record of a ton of planets.
The Domain Probes can be ok, but I haven't seen anything particularly amazing - just poor luck, I guess?

No Synchotron. I just now finally managed to scavenge one, which is exciting. It just struck me as odd the Fuel Prod requires other stuff to be "good", but if that's intentional, cool. The description does say it's not very good.

33
Suggestions / My lodse Feedback & Thoughts re 0.9a
« on: November 20, 2018, 02:12:48 PM »
Starting with the obligatory praise: I've had a good amount of fun the past few days with the new patch, and it's been a while since I've put this much time into SS. Pretty cool.
Saying that, there's stuff I have thoughts on, old and new. I realize a a fair amount, if not all, of this is scattered in feedback in other threads elsewhere, but I find it easier to sort my thoughts this way, and just put it all together.

On with the poorly formatted wall. Whoops.

1) No (apparent) way to influence Deployment Points in combat.
Problem: DP / force deployment is a critical part of winning a fight, and your ability to influence it is minimal at best. Also: How the heck do I take out a huge station with only 100 DP without massive losses?

Potential Solution: Make a Skill increase the amount of DP you get per-fight. Either fold it into an existing Leadership one (Command and Control?), or make a new one for it (but then you'd need extra benefits, I think - JUST DP seems lackluster). Potentially make a flagship-specific Hullmod for it as well?

Goal of Solution: The amount of DP you have per fight seems to be dictated maybe by a comparison between the 2 parties fleets, then the "Battle Size" is split between them. This feels similar to Mount and Blade's "Battle Advantage" stat. Essentially, I'm asking for a "Tactics" skill to permit swinging the "Battle Advantage" in your favor somehow, so you have another way to influence a battle and playstyle.



2) Colonization Market Share pacing is wonky.
Problem(s):
Market Share is easily taken over in a variety of fields by simple production, outpacing Core Worlds' productions with just a few of your own colonies. Or quite easily, just one colony.
Interacting with other faction colonies (to raid them) feels fairly unnecessary overall.

Potential Solution(s):
Change "Free Port" to lessen (say down to 1520%) or outright remove the Accessibility bonus, but increase the Prod & Infrastructure's Benefit  more shady characters, more outright production of "illegal" goods and manpower. The lessened Accessibility will slow down your domination of the market, and require you to impair their industries to maintain an edge.
Increasing Core Faction Production or Accessibility somehow would help, as you wouldn't be able to immediately take over the market. Maybe increase the "Proximity to Other Colonies" accessibility benefit, or lower the penalty from hostilies? That way the Core Worlds aren't so debilitated.

Goal of Solutions: Make Market Share Domination require more interactive behavior to attain  if you want to make your living with colony management, it's something you'll have to focus on beyond "shove money in, wait." The Stab Hit from Free Port is good asis, as it represents well how inviting a bunch of underworlders could cause troubles.



3) Colony "Expansion"/Growth
Problem: What to build at a colony doesn't require too much thought beyond "can I afford this?". You can otherwise spring up 9 industries in some 30 days, which is odd.

Potential Solution: You have an amount of "workable" Industrial "Tiles" equal to something like ~2+your Colony Size. Make it part of a Skill to increase this by 1? If you have no Workable Tile, you can't produce another Industry. Alternatively, it worsens the output of every Industry, as you strain your population, which could just manifest as an Accessibility penalty.

Notes on this topic: The "base production" of a tile DOES scale with your Colony Size, which does represent how, for example, your Mining Industry grows from a small one to a planetscale one, so I dunno how necessary this really is. What's more, I disagree very much with having a bunch of upgrades for individual tiles  that's merely more clicking & having to remember to have to upgrade things until they're max and after playing Stellaris, I don't need that. As it is, every time I install Batteries, Patrol HQ, or Orbital Station I have to remember to go back to upgrade it (or click the prompt when it says it's finished, if I notice it). The current system of "Most things are slowgrowth, but can be accelerated via an infusion of money" (Growth Incentives) is a very good one, IMO.
SickSock's Demographic Idea could be interesting. It lets you differentiate different colonies more, and the idea of demographics in general could be vastly expanded as desierd. I'd be fond of simply adding them as "Planetary Conditions". I know there seem to be "Colony Conditions" like Pollution and Decivilized, and they would work well here. Alternatively, have them function like AI Cores where they're assigned to a specific industry and they provide effects?

Goal of Solution: Make Colony scaling more gradual and produce more choices on Industry building.



4) Expeditions are slightly overbearing. Will be sparse, as there's a big thread on it.
Problem: You get swarmed by them a mite bit too much..

Potential Solution: Make them have some bleedin' cost to the AI. Ideally, you can interact with it in some way, because as it is, the overall economy seems to be functionally irrelevant to the AI, which isn't cool.

Goal of Solution: Increase interaction with player's faction and other factions' threat projection.



5) Aptitudes are still semi-meh.
Problem: Putting a point into an Aptitude is boring, and feels bad. It's essentially a "dead level", just letting you *eventually* get what you want.

Potential Solution: Create "Aptitude Points" and "Skill Points". At level 2, you get 2 Aptitude Points and 2 skill points. Then, every 8th level or so, reward an Aptitude Point and a Skill Point. Alternatively (and less excitingly) make Aptitudes grant a small generic bonus in themselves. For example, Combat could be +2% damage taken/received, Leadership could be +1% for allied ships, +1.5% OP for ship, who knows for Industry. Yes, this might lead to some people going "The aptitude feels underpowered." Guess what they are now, though? Bad feeling, and also underpowered.

Goal of Solution: Prevent dead levels.



6) Interpersonal Relations and Interactions, Empire Leadership
Disclaimer: I imagine this is all a WIP, as Colonies were literally just added.
Problem: Your abilities to interact with other peoples are still lacking. If you get attacked, they say "Surrender or die"  you can't Surrender. Building relationships with people is both hard and also apparently useless.

Potential Solution: Add more stuff here. Make "Fleet Admirals" of other nations more prominent and persistent (see Mount and Blade & Shadow of Mordor's Nemesis system for example). The Luddic Path at lowest Rep says there's probably an "highranking officer" whose assignment is just to hunt me down. Make that an actual thing! As it is, other people are just meaningless faces with a number by them.
Problem: "I have this giant empire and I have to do everything myself". You can't order anybody around to do anything, not even simple stuff like organize an expedition of your own, send out prospectors/salvagers, have an allied fleet follow you, etc.

Potential Solution: Add that stuff. Throw a tab up in the "Command" section that lets you do this, and let you issue orders to your faction when you encounter them on the map. Tying into the "prominent characters", maybe make it so you can hire Fleet Admirals for your nation, who are more independent in how they act, and are able to be ordered to do more things  like maybe you can't order all your Patrols & Detachments to follow you around (at least, not out of the system), but Fleet Admirals can. Again, this can take inspiration from M&B with their Lords.

Goal of Solution: Make interactions with other factions & peoples more meaningful and interesting.



7) Black Markets & Harvested Organs.
Problem: There are seemingly no negatives to smuggling everything everywhere and being an overal illegal trader boi. I made absurd amounts of money with black market Organ trading, especially with Procurement Missions, and not once was I concerned about getting in trouble. Organ Procurement missions are exceedingly good in general. Being "bad" at black market trading is hard to do, and isn't very penalizing. Also, why do any Procurement/Trading mission that ISN'T Harvested Organs? Or really, any other mission in general, given it's high-risk, basically no reward.

Potential "Solution": The repercussions of trafficking illegal goods and trading on the black market should be more pronounced if you fail to properly hide your actions, and it should be harder than it currently is. That would mean more of a threat of being scanned  say, in controlled space by jumppoints there are basic gates that scan for "potentially illegal" goods, and will direct a patrol to scan you if detected, and maybe bring back (?) investigations, but let their efficacy be influenced by eg bribery, stability of the trade hub, etc. Illegal goods shouldn't be best sold in pirate areas  bafflingly, Qaras and Kapetyn's Starworks are ENORMOUSLY better salepoints for Organs.
I dunno if it's in and I just haven't seen it, but adding the Shielded Cargo Holds as a hullmod you can add would be nice too, as otherwise you have to rely on Pirate hulls to get them, which are rarer than it seems they should be, and probably Dmodded.

Goal of Solution: Make Black Marketeering more interesting, mainly by increasing its danger.



8} Invasions
Problem: They don't exist! Yes, I know they're still on the table. I just want to give some thoughts on how they might easily fold into existing systems, so hopefully nobody does a silly thing like decide they don't need to be in the game due to difficulty of implementation.

The Idea: Under Military Actions, add an "Invade Planet" option. It requires essentially a Raid Effectiveness of 100% or higher, as well as requiring Heavy Armaments and Supplies. The amount required is equal to the planets Defenses value, but only Supplies are consumed. In a way, the Invasion is treated similar to Surveying, but instead use Marines, Heavy Armaments, and Supplies. The Marines and HA are "deployed" to the battlefield, but are recovered if successful. Extra Marines can be deployed to aid the fight, but at diminishing returns, and only so many (say, up to double the initial required amount)
Properly invading a planet takes months even on the small end, and how well it is progressing is indicated by a very obvious bi-colored bar (representing your control versus their control) with its own neat little +-% by it and a breakdown tooltip, like Growth. If the Planet has an Operating defensive battery network, progression is extremely penalized. Over time or through interactions (eg, enemy controlling the airspace), you might lose deployed Marines and HA, slowing your progress unless replenished.
Once fully occupied (the bar is filled), the planet is yours but will be suffering from "Resistance" - similar to how Luddic Sabotage works, it generously provides Recent Unrest.



9) Miscellaneous Junk, Requests, and Notes
-Please add a planet listing for each faction to the faction screen, or a sort option in the planets screen. Whichever.
-Not so Miscellaneous: Maybe add a way to (slowly) Research & Develop  blueprints? Increased via reverse-engineering the equipment (destroys it). This way it isn't basically RNG of what you get. Would be boosted by a Technology skill, and require some Industry (existing or new one)
-Add indicators for if a building can be upgraded (a simple arrow at the top left of its picture is good)
-Explain to me what "Markets under AI Control" means on the Colonies listing screen. The heck is that?
-Make Neutrino Detector not require gosh-danged Volatiles, what am I even supposed to do with this ability? Why is it so nonstandard in its use of requiring a specific material?
-Not sure Remote Survey is that useful - anybody disagree? Hazard-ratings are decent info, but ultimately resources on the planet & survey data are too important to not check anyways.
-I want something to make Exploration & in particular planetary survey to be something more than RNG "I hope this planet is good" -> "Oh I ran out of supplies, better head back to resupply" repeat, but I'm unsure how to go about that. At the very least, being able to determine if a system is likely to have a good planet or not without diving into it would be helpful. Maybe Volatiles and Neutrino could somehow work into here?
-How do I clear my fleet log holy carp it's full of outdated garbage.
-Is it intended for Fuel Production to be so expensive that without a Beta+ AI Core, it's a net loss?
-Espionage and spies when? Gotta get them BPs.
-Thanks.

34
Suggestions / Re: stat point allocation for the skill trees
« on: April 24, 2017, 05:54:24 AM »
"To keep people from ranking up all the trees for their respective buffs I would say make each of the buffs contingent on the skills in the tree."

Is this really a problem? You're still putting points into the tree and not other things, so they have a cost.
If the aptitudes were to represent broad knowledges, it'd just mean you, say, have a very broad knowledge of "Leadership", but not anything specific or specialized (which is what the skills would mean). Doesn't seem like you have to double-up on that investment.
I suppose the reasoning that you'd want them contingent on putting more points into the tree is so you could make the benefits somewhat significant? Not sure if it's really necessary; would depend on execution.

The idea that the aptitudes should (again) grant small passives is a common one, though, so I hope it gets somewhere. Alex posted a response to it here http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=11477.msg202555#msg202555, with

"This is a tough one for me. Not having any bonus at all is a bit harsh, but it communicates the purpose much more clearly. If there was a tiny token bonus, I'm guessing there would be a number of threads to the tune of "aptitude X effect is underpowered".

Personally, I just wait until there's 2 points to spend, so I feel like I get something every time I spend points, whether it's for each point or not."

(Which while I could respond to that thread, this seems like a good thread to focus on the topic itself, as it's a big one)

To me, the idea that our game dev is actually waiting until there are 2 points to spend speaks that there's a problem here. That he does that is insane to me. Intentionally "ignoring" a level-up until you have 2 of them so the level-up is meaningful makes me think something is wrong. I really hope he agrees there and changes it.
And frankly, a few silly threads are a small price to pay to make the game feel better and people should be reading the descriptions of the aptitudes anyways. Or they'll just note that they serve as caps, and make the connection...so hopefully there won't be that many threads.

Megas suggests removing the aptitudes entirely. A somewhat interesting idea, but I just wonder how much "encouragement of specialization" we lose if we do that (certainly some), and if such encouragement is really necessary or beneficial to the game? There was an idea somewhere where it was suggested that certain content is gated based on your aptitudes (such as "analyze planet" missions don't even show up unless you have some level of Industry aptitude) and that could be interesting, but then you could just tie such things to actually having the Surveying skill directly, rendering the aptitude itself superfluous.

35
General Discussion / Re: Responding to distress calls never worth it?
« on: April 24, 2017, 04:43:46 AM »
It'd probably be a decent idea for them to possibly grant rarer items, like a good modspec or survey data or something, depending on what the fleet was. Plus a bit more plain cash. Or whatever.
That way you see that "distress call" and you might go "oh boy, I wonder if I'll get something cool...or maybe get ambushed by a 3-fleet pirate force"?

Personally I've responded to 2 distress calls. The first was a pirate trap that I e-burned to escape (it was kind of exciting, made funn(i)er because I jumped in going "I bet this is a trap"), and the second was...as they are. Combined with the cost of having to redirect my fleet in hyperspace, I decided to not bother with distress calls anymore. Maybe a bit hasty, but meh.

36
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.8a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: April 23, 2017, 09:36:45 AM »
Wait, does the sun type actually matter for the average survey data levels you can expect from the planets in its system, as well as the actual planet types?

The most I've noticed is that Volcanic planets are seemingly always about class 4 because of tons of ore and rare ore, but I haven't been paying a great deal of attention to it all.
I tried one time to see if I could find any patterns, and I noted an orange star's (I think it was) description mentioned habitable planets being extra common BUT (if I recall correctly) I didn't notice anything particularly good around the 2 Orange Stars I checked - but then I only checked like two, so not worth much.
Need more data.

37
Suggestions / Re: S-burn balance....
« on: April 23, 2017, 08:41:09 AM »
Ah, crap. Yeah, you're right. Dunno how I flipped them. My bad.

Man, I think that'd make me hate using sub-100 ships even more, heh.

38
Suggestions / Re: S-burn balance....
« on: April 23, 2017, 07:20:31 AM »
Look, everyone says surveying and exploration needs to be nerfed because it's a cash cow. What if the nerf is not having S-burn be in the game at all? Then the cost will be more time and more supply ships for those missions.

If you want to nerf a specific thing, then nerf it directly. Don't do sideways slanting stuff with "I'll remove Y, and then maybe R will be better" - fact is, basically everything has to travel far. Trading, bounties, exploration. Hell, a lot of the bounties I see are just as far as most exploration. You remove S-Burn, you hurt that stuff too.

Yea, maybe some player's will get bored or find it tedious going on those long voyages; maybe they'll go off and do combat. Maybe others will find it atmospheric, and it will make the sector seem bigger and more mysterious and alien? Tedium can be good in some cases.

Let's just say I disagree here to such an extent that I consider this suggestion insulting. To me this reads as you suggesting to drag players down to your desired speed of play and "screen-staring" because you seemingly lack the ability to just not use S-Burn and thus now it feels small to you (?) There are surely better ways to increase "atmosphere" and to make it seem "more mysterious and alien" than legging everything.

To go with the first response, a "nerf" to create some "now the player has to wonder: do they want to sit there doing almost nothing for the entire time as their fleet explores to make cash money, or do they want to just do something actually interesting instead to make less space-creds?" decision is terrible.

Exploration/surveying and traveling as a whole would be better served with a dedicated topic discussing it, as IF it needs changes, it needs more than "Adjust S-Burn such that it takes a lot of player time."

Honestly if it were me I'd say make every ship's speed in campaign be whatever its speed in combat is. There, done. But then it would be different, emergent forms of fleet composition and combat instead of WWII in space.

Unless you drastically change burn speeds, you're risking putting all the ships at about the same speed. The Burn range is very narrow, with most ships being 8-10. You could put these at large jumps in ability (say an 8-burn is our current 90, and a 10 burn is our current 150, or whatnot), but if they're not significantly disparate, the differences become almost meaningless.
However, you lose a large amount of granularity in speeds, which will warrant some significant changes to ships (eg, 10-burn 180 speed hounds will suddenly be the same as the 10-burn 120 speed hounds, meaning they just lost some advantage) which means work to rebalance, which isn't exciting.
The idea itself doesn't seem too bad, as making numbers the same between modes of play helps to streamline it... but it will change the game a fair amount and require some work to do, and it isn't really necessary.

39
Suggestions / Re: S-burn balance....
« on: April 22, 2017, 12:45:00 PM »
It's odd how different my experience seems to be than everybody elses'. Everybody seems to be clamoring for S-Burn nerfs, and I think nerfing it as-is could very likely make for a more boring game.
Note: This post got a bit more rambly than expected, and I'm not overly experienced at the game. Plus I alt-tabbed out of a fight and want to get back to that. Forgive me if my thoughts jump all over, or I state something wrong.

I like S-Burn right now. I don't feel like the sector is "small" or any such thing - there are dozens upon dozens of systems in default-options sector (each one that you can explore - you don't *have* to fly in a single direction for 90 days for a thing to have "more space") and I still sometimes sit and stare at my screen on S-Burn while holding shift to get around. If something feels small it's because there are only 2 dozen or so inhabited systems by a few factions that don't try to expand. I most definitely don't want to have to alt-tab because of huge travel times or sit and stare at my screen as I hold shift for long periods of time. That isn't content I find fun, or immersion-improving, or whatever else. S-Burn majorly helps avoid such situations.

I also use E-burn sometimes. A lot? No, but I don't feel like I'm supposed to constantly use it. S-Burn destroys my maneuverability while in, stops my fleet to activate, and slows my acceleration - sometimes I need to e-burn away or in a different direction really fast to escape somebody. I sure am not instantly turning around and S-burning in the opposite direction without huge risk of them e-burning into me before I can actually build up the speed to escape.

Honestly, I shift it on/off a fair amount because of how much it decreases my turning ability. And when I do that when enemies are near, I'm also thinking if I'll be able to build speed back up before they e-burn into me.

Embolism suggested making shift speed up time more - this is a possibility I can support, if S-Burn is "nerfed." I'm still hesitant to say so though - warnings can make it safer, but they also make traveling more irritating (suddenly stopping time) or if you disable them, much more dangerous as it reduces your time to react. Then you're choosing between "irritating unexpected tops" or "extremely dangerous to reduce the time you spend waiting as a player." I don't think either of those are very great.

On "Burn" as a stat - I think it still has a purpose. It's primarily made "meh" (if it indeed is) because of how speed bands interact, and how the AI is limited.
1) The "Speed bands" of ships are about about 8-10 (Normal), 13-15 (E-Burn), and 18-20 (S-Burn).
2) The AI doesn't have access to the third band, as it cannot S-Burn.
3) The Third band is the fastest band, and even the slowest speed of it is decently faster than the highest of the 2nd band.
4) Burn speeds are capped at 20.
This means that if your entire fleet is 8-burn you can still escape a "fast" AI fleet, so it doesn't even matter that your ships are innately slower. Then with the 20-burn cap, the 11-Burn of Falcons and whatnot ends up being *mostly* useless - either you hit the 20-cap, or the extra benefit it provides is already unnecessary. It does help when you're in an E-Burn "chase" since it puts you above the AI, but those are not overly common.

40
Modding / Re: Umozes Corvus nomads Q
« on: May 17, 2012, 03:26:44 PM »
I can make a special version for you with that (nomads ship in Heg station) ;)

I would appreciate that very much, Uomoz.

41
Modding / Re: Umozes Corvus nomads Q
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:45:58 PM »
Is there an easyish way to make them all purchasable from some stations? Like, myself?
It's apparent the dev won't do it, and I want them to be able to buy them, so how would I do that?

42
Mods / Re: DSTech Corp Fleet v0.1a - New Ships and Weapons -
« on: May 11, 2012, 09:01:24 AM »
Greetings, fellow Cortex Command player! You've been here far longer than I, but you making this topic made me remember you ;)

On the mod: I like the style it appears you have set up, with hit/run and high flux. My kind of thing :D Looks interesting.

43
Mods / Re: The Nomads (0.8.1)
« on: May 09, 2012, 02:46:59 PM »
Am I missing something, or is there no way to purchase Nomad ships and whatnot? I can't dock at Adum'Tulek (which is where it appears the Nomads spawn from?), but it looks like some of you are acquiring their craft/weaponry - are you merely capturing them?
These ships are among my favorite, so I want a fleet of them, but peacefully :(

44
Announcements / Re: Starfarer 0.52.1a (Released) - Patch Notes
« on: May 09, 2012, 02:06:59 PM »
  • Added the ability to have ground battles.


I know this is a 'joke' but is there any sort of intention to ever add anything like this?
I'd like this, provided it wasn't done terribly - and judging from the current content, things aren't done terribly around here.

45
Announcements / Re: Starfarer 0.5a Preview (Released) - Live Patch Notes
« on: February 14, 2012, 02:03:06 PM »
Basher? Lasher? Brawler?  ???
Hah! Meant to say Brawler. The system police/port authority security assault gunship.
Fixed that.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4