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 - Schwartz

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 95
1
Suggestions / Re: Disabled Ship = Escape Pods, not Boom
« on: January 23, 2023, 07:49:21 PM »
What's edgy about it? I'm looking at this purely from an interesting game mechanic standpoint.

I also don't think there's official "rules of engagement" in the StarSector universe? Hegemony may have a code regarding this, but when there's no watchful eyes, everybody could and does probably play dirty.

2
Suggestions / Re: Disabled Ship = Escape Pods, not Boom
« on: January 22, 2023, 09:52:23 PM »
Yeah, would be cool. Also let enemy ship PD target escape pods. Doesn't have to change any statistics, but this could give a tiny temporary downside to the upside of having one less enemy ship against you.

3
Suggestions / Re: Poison gameplay loop; (by design)
« on: January 18, 2023, 01:00:02 AM »
I meant the other part. That 100% does not give certain bonuses, but having skills on top of 100% gives bonuses. The decoupling of the two is what would be strange.

And it's just as intuitive to start out with smaller health bars that grow to maximum in the course of a game.

4
General Discussion / Re: I need help with GraphicsLib PLZZZ
« on: January 18, 2023, 12:57:50 AM »
You enable it like any other mod. When you extract it, the folder "GraphicsLib" needs to be in the "mods" subfolder of the game. Then select the mod in the Starsector launcher. The mod itself needs no configuration.

5
Suggestions / Re: Poison gameplay loop; (by design)
« on: January 17, 2023, 07:41:29 PM »
Just having max CR always be 100% and the skills add the high CR benefits sounds good.

Sounds convoluted. Another thing that'll need more explaining than it does now. All this to plug a theoretical hole that outside of this thread most people haven't noticed or cared about. Idk.

6
Suggestions / Re: Poison gameplay loop; (by design)
« on: January 17, 2023, 08:36:28 AM »
The idea that players will scam themselves out of all the fun has come up before. Frankly, I think that's one of those things that sounds like a neat theory but hardly anyone does it. It's true for a small subset of players who have a certain powergaming mindset, and even then savescumming again and again surely has to eventually result in a realization like "What the hell am I doing with my time?". This exploit is a good example. It's valid; it can give a player more CR if he is willing to engage in some tedious time waste before every battle.

When there's a lot of pressure through difficulty, say Dark Souls, players will discover and use way more exploitative strategies because playing the game straight is itself a painful activity. I consider having to learn every enemy pattern and then play accordingly to beat them to be close to the mind-numbing chore of Dance Dance Revolution and those kinds of games. The game says "Do it exactly like I tell you or suffer".

Starsector is not like that. The player learns its systems in a much more relaxed and general way and is not severely punished for ignorance - in most cases. The need to optimize his own fun out of the game just to be able to play the game is simply not there. Reloading to beat combat engagements (which I know are beatable) is as far as I'm personally willing to go.

7
Suggestions / Re: Poison gameplay loop; (by design)
« on: January 17, 2023, 05:58:51 AM »
Willingness to do this kind of thing is proportional to how unforgivingly hard the game actually is. Starsector is not hard. It is challenging when you pick the wrong battles or get caught in a situation you shouldn't have been caught in. Actually, as soon as you have some decent ships in your fleet, the game is quite easy and you're not liable to lose your ships even against bigger odds. Actually actually, the CR bonus for officers is still a great skill so my officered ships end up having that, too. By which point it becomes a non-issue.

So I've never done this exploit and I don't see it as a big problem for the player population either. It may be worthwhile to plug this, as long as it doesn't come with another weird and gamey explanation. Simply having ships limited to their current max CR rather than it "trickling down" would probably be fine. But really this is such an exotic (read: masochistic) exploit that I don't really see the need to go that hard.

8
1. every s-mode has  the same  OP worth 25  (when hullmode is cheaper then rest of OP is added as to thee ship budget)
2. max OP worth s-moded  hullmode is 25 (more expensive hulmode canot be s-moded; plain general rule)

(OP prices  are for capital  size, smaller ship sizes has smaller limits  accordingly)

Some interesting ideas there. It could be tried. Generally I get the feeling this change is trying to compensate for problems that are already very small. Since SS is a singleplayer game, there is always the luxury of just leaving it be and not having everything be the exact same power level as everything else. This may "feel wrong" but overbalancing tends to result in weird appendixes (as in, the bodypart) to existing systems.

I'll offer an option #3: Every story point added to a ship just increases the ship's OP by 10/15/20 whatever is the correct number for its size. That's it. No more S-Mods. With the same SP limits as before. Could also pay a single SP to add a bonus effect to one of the ship's hullmods.

9
When you hover over the Download button, you get shown a link to the installer. It shows RC6 right now, which means RC6 is the current version. Are you sure those mods aren't looking for a previous version with a high RC number? 0.95a RC15 is an old version, for example. Note the missing subversion 1.

10
Yep, and it's also kinda funny that they get penalized for costing so much OP - not necessarily because they're so powerful that they're worth their OP cost. So that thing I was suggesting as a joke - just making expensive hullmods cheaper so we wouldn't have to penalize them as S-Mods - actually applies.

To me, there are many top-tier hullmods that are roughly equally useful. Missile Racks, Hardened Shields, Heavy Armor, ITU, Hardened Subs (for frigates) just off the top of my head. And their usefulness also depends on the kind of ship they're fitted to. Are they all receiving penalties to their main functionality as S-Mods? A side-grade is the last thing I'm looking for when I spend story points. I want a bump in usability and some free OP. Although the OP increase is secondary to me not having a bad time when I want to use the ship.

Please think good and hard whether penalties have any place in a storypoint-based ship loadout "elite promotion" kind of system. I'd rather take a hit to the power level of hullmods. I'd rather see their OP costs rejuggled. I'd rather see fewer S-Mods per ship maximum than penalties. Although I think none of these measures are actually necessary in the current state of the game.

11
S-Mods may have been a spontaneous addition, but they also almost entirely replaced the OP bonuses that we used to get through player fleet skills before. As such they were a required addition to give the player some breathing room in loadouts, and any tinkering with them will impact the power of the player fleet - not so much that of enemy fleets. Player fleet power is already reduced vs. previous game versions. I am not against nerfs - but I am against nerfs to player enjoyment where the gain to me is not immediately obvious. "Less fun but more flavor" is not a gain, to me. And as someone who likes to use high-ammo missiles like Locusts and Annihilators the most, and uses them in conjunction with ammo bonuses so they can last through or close to your average big fleet engagement, this S-Mod malus lands exactly in a spot where I wouldn't want it to land.

It's not a "well, now that this S-Mod is worse you can spend your OP elsewhere so why cry", it's a devaluing of a hullmod that did not need it. Here's another quick take: Make Extended Missile Racks just cost less OP and remove the S-Mod nerf.

Do I think it should cost less OP? No, it's fine where it is. This is just a silly take on "Everyone S-Mods this because of its OP cost".

12
General Discussion / Re: Help from Devteam
« on: January 07, 2023, 02:18:21 AM »
Es kommt halt mit jeder Version einiges an Text dazu. Für die aktuelle Version wird das wohl eher schlecht funktionieren, selbst wenn man die Mod zum laufen bringt. Der Modmacher sagte ja selbst, dass die Mod auch für 0.9.1 nicht als Final angesehen werden kann.

Ich würde die Mod entfernen und auf Englisch spielen, bis sich jemand des Themas annimmt. Wir haben hier ein paar deutsche Modder, aber eine Übersetzung ist halt reine Fleißarbeit und Mods entstehen meistens weil derjenige auch Bock drauf hat. Wenn Mortrag es macht wäre das natürlich cool.

13
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Very low FPS
« on: January 06, 2023, 09:40:49 AM »
Cool, glad that worked. You'll get better FPS in Minecraft too now. ;)

14
Also, no we don't just S-Mod the most expensive hullmods. Adding Heavy Armor to a high-tech ship just because it's an expensive hullmod is a total waste, just as adding Missile Racks to a Paragon is bordering on silly. Even for a Dominator the choice is not so clear-cut, because the Armor hullmods come in a bunch (Armor, EMP resist, Armored Mounts.. possibly Thrusters). It depends on the role. For a brawling Domi I'd just slap Annihilators on there and possibly make the S-Mods more about mobility and survivability. A RoF nerf would certainly not make me want to use Missile Racks at all.

That buff to frigate damage sounds pretty big too; if I'd heard about it I'd have an opinion, but I don't follow Twitter stuff.  ;)

15
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Very low FPS
« on: January 06, 2023, 07:57:11 AM »
Is your graphics driver older than Oct 2022? AMD fixed their OpenGL to a good degree with that driver version so the game should run better from then on. You can get version 22.11.2 WHQL here. Make sure to "clean install".

Yes, LWJGL and AMD OpenGL do not play nicely together but with the latest driver it's very playable.

Also, if you run GraphicsLib, you can try going into GRAPHICS_OPTIONS.ini in the mod folder and setting  "enableShaders":false, to get some more FPS.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 95