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 - DatonKallandor

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 48
An extra mount is appreciated on the Falcon, but I gotta say I much preferred the look of the old one. Especially the front left hangar bay. Having it just end at the same angle in mid-space as the hull looks odd to me. The recessed one that had some extra hull after the bay ended looked much better to me.

I also liked the asymetrical second bay placement a lot visually, but obviously that takes away the mount option. But it helped make the Falcon visually distinct from the Eagle and that was cool.

Suggestions / Re: Ship cattegory predefined role in combat?
« on: December 10, 2020, 02:21:13 PM »
Shrikes tend to burn in too far because of their ship system and then they switch to backing out of the fight again to the range they actually want to be at.

Got 2 hours-ish of run in, and so far it seems to work very well. The initial meeting between two decent sized fleets is brutal on account of the strikecraft waves meeting, but it levels off quickly when they start to get whittled down and replacement slows. Fire support weapons work properly for the first time because of the passthrough, and it's great.

Haven't managed to test a full-on PD ship build with the new pass-through PD, but looking at some of it, I suspect the range might be too short for the pass-through to matter. But even if that's the case, nothing changes and it's just the same (decently balanced) PD situation AO had before that change.

Suggestions / Re: Why is Restore Expensive?
« on: December 08, 2020, 03:16:02 PM »
I can't help but laugh when someone says "well actually a ship with d-mods is the norm". Yea sure, a frigate slower than a destroyer is normal, a cruiser with less range than a destroyer is fine, a cruiser that eats as much supplies as a dreadnaught is fine, a ship that can't even fire the cheapest possible guns without overfluxing is fine. One of the things that makes this game so bloody great for me is the build customization part. But when ships in your fleet can only fit certain weapons with specific hullmods to help alleviate the d-mods it gets pretty annoying.

Inb4 you don't need to build your ships around d-mods - Well I do unless I want to be caught by other fleets and watch AI suicide in half of my ships because they can't engage properly.

I think you are massively overestimating how much of a difference D-mods make in practice. Not to mention in a vanilla game, you're not going to run into everyone having massive fleets of pristine ships.

I actually think pristine ships aren't good enough, compared to D-mod ships, and suggested a skill line that is the opposite of Industry that specs into being better with perfect ships but that's a whole other topic, that's probably solved by the upcoming story point for free hullmod mechanic.

Speaking of that mechanic it already makes Restore stronger - now you're not only getting rid of D-mods, you're also preserving a story point investment. And yet, the price of restoring didn't go up. You're getting more value for the same money. And that story point investment is also not wasted if you don't restore (or don't restore immediately), because those free hullmods are still on the ship, D-mods or not.

Suggestions / Re: Why is Restore Expensive?
« on: December 08, 2020, 07:38:43 AM »
I do not fully agree with this.  It just means the player puts up with junk early until he no longer needs to.  Most of my games began much the same.  Beat up pirates, make do with a junk fleet of mostly Enforcers, Mules, and Shrike (P) until I take down some stronger fleets, then get more clunkers (from bounties or expeditions) until I can finally build my own pristine ships near the end of the game.  Forcing the player to live with inferior junk is not adding anything, it just forces the player to live with, well... junk.  That is not fun, because it says the player is not allowed to have nice things (until after significant grinding or other tricks).  As I wrote previously, it is a reason why I like endgame most, because player has nice things then.

It helps if you don't think of D-mod ships as "junk" and pristine ships are normal, because that's not the case. D-mod ships are the normal, and pristine is the rare legendary item. Hell thinking of it in ARPG terms could help with the preception:

Pristine is legendary, orange top loot that you are only swimming in in the endgame. As you add more and more D-mods the quality of the ship goes down the colour spectrum.

Pristine would lose all meaning if it was easy to get, the progression would be shot to hell and the game would just in general be worse. The fact that ubiquitious D-mods also fits the fluff is just a bonus but a welcome one.

I think strictly defining the role of hulls like that might cut out too much of the fun of building ships.

I'm getting the impression the next version might have a significant bump in lethality just from the AI changes alone - it sounds like it'll get flux-on-target a lot better. Less wasted shots (the "main gun fires at random fighter despite enemy ship being directly ahead" is also supposed to be fixed I think) should lead to more consistent kills when the opportunity comes around.

On the topic of PD pass-through: I think is very good but has to be very carefully balanced. Overlapping PD could have the potential to be very oppressive. Maybe reserve PD pass-through for a new category of PD? "Long-Range PD" or something? That would be a good place for flux-using PD too perhaps. Bigger opportunity cost (flux buildup) but big upside (fleet support).

Supposedly the "fires weapon thinking it's in range but it's not" issue that especially affects beams is fixed for the next version, as is the AI triggering a burst weapon and immediately sweeping the mount away from the target.

Frankly a lot of exact combat balancing is probably not worth doing right now, because there are so many AI changes and fixes in the next version it'll throw any balance established with the current version out of whack anyway. At least that's the impression I'm getting from the various teasers and patch notes Alex has put out.

I think the very high flux cost and inefficiency (and low fire rate) of the really long range artillery fire support weapons is going to keep them from being overpowered even with ally pass-through. It's not like you can stack a ton of them on one ship - it'd be able to fire a fraction of the guns, once, and then be forced to vent.

I agree. It is a matter of the dev time taken to script that behavior. Anyone remember what mod does that? I know I asked a long while back but I never got around to checking out how complicated it would be or whether the code to do that is open source.
0.95 has (unless it gets removed between now and release) a player skill that gives all beams x% hard flux - that would mean there's going to be easy code support for that. Maybe wait until then?

Honestly, it might be worth thinking about ditching the whole "beams only do soft flux" mechanic altogether for AO. It causes nothing but balance headaches and doesn't really make anything better.

Suggestions / Re: Pirates as Remnants
« on: November 21, 2020, 05:05:13 AM »
Pirates *want* to be well known. That's how they'd get what they want.

The Pirate "gameplay loop" is this:
Find fleet that looks like they're easy pickings -> intercept -> open comms and demand money/cargo.
If they agree to pay up, the pirates leave them alone.
If they don't agree to pay up, the pirates blow them up.

The optimal situation is never fighting and the way they get to that point is by always blowing up people that don't pay and never blowing up people that do.

The moment a pirate starts to kill people for no reason or even when they paid the ransom, people will stop surrendering. But a pirate known for leaving when paid will simply get their spoils without ever having to fire a shot. A bloodthirsty pirate is an ineffective pirate is a dead pirate.

Suggestions / Re: Directional Omni shield Control (again)
« on: November 10, 2020, 04:30:32 PM »
Or just give us the option to hand omni-shield control to the AI.

General Discussion / Re: General Thoughts from a new player
« on: November 09, 2020, 05:26:32 AM »
Slap on some mods, and go to cycle 215+, there it becomes a crawl.

Mods causing a problem is a horrible justification to not have a quality of life feature.

Make it a toggle. People that don't like it or are using too many mods can turn it off. People that expect something that has been industry standard for more than a decade for good reason to be in the game get to have that QoL feature.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: October 30, 2020, 09:54:42 AM »
Consider this: if you can put the same thing in every slot, then every slot is functionally the same, just bigger or smaller, there's no qualitative difference between what they let you do, just quantitative. On the other hand, if for example a medium energy slot and a large energy slot have quite different things that go in them, then *ships* become more interesting and varied simply due to the differences in which of these slots they have.

Now, having a few weapons that are just a bigger/smaller version of something else doesn't take things all the way to this extreme. But it does take things some ways towards it, and that's why I'm generally not keen on it.

One way to think of it is this - you have different slot types, right- ballistic, energy, missile. They make ships very different! Slot sizes are a little like this, too, and this is good because it makes ships more different. The more similar-but-a-different-size weapons there are, the less this is the case.

100% this! Keep the weapon selection mean and lean and force people to make choices. Having 5 different weapons that all do the same thing with a minute 2% difference for every single role is the worst.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 48