Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

16

Suggestions / [0.9.1a-RC6] Atlas Mk.II hitbox is huge

« on: May 15, 2019, 09:37:58 AM »

The hitbox for phase mines that is. I don't know if these work with the same outline as the damage model does, but you can't put phase mines close to these big buggers. The game will do strange things if you try.

The X is where I set the mines. The two mines to the south is where they appeared.

Spoiler

[close]

Edit: Dunno if I put it in Suggestions on purpose or if someone moved it.. I think this should be under Bugs?

17

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9.1a-RC6] Fleet engage logic & player involvement

« on: May 14, 2019, 08:54:05 AM »

So this happened in the old version as well, but I remember reading about this having been looked at. Anyway, it still happens and it's just one of those little oddities.

I see an allied fleet hugging an enemy fleet. Combat is clearly going on. I approach and want to participate. Game says my allies let the enemy forces withdraw without incident. Fair enough. Only if I'd waited and watched, I would have seen these two fleets tear into one another. And even after this 'forced withdraw' I can wait and watch them making a beeline for each other again and continuing combat. That is, unless I intervene again.

It would be nice to have some consistency here. If these two fleets would have fought, let me fight too. If they would have backed off, make them back off without me having to force their hand.

18

Suggestions / More fleet doctrine settings

« on: May 14, 2019, 06:34:17 AM »

So we all love to play around with fleet doctrine. I noticed something cool the other day: They actually use player-made loadouts for hulls that have them. But they seem to mix and match these with other general loadouts. Reading the threads for the last couple of days has given me some ideas that could make it into the fleet doctrine settings.

The settings are already fairly in-depth, but they all work more like suggestions than actual rules. This can be both a good and a bad thing. Good, when the game tries to match fleets up to their intended size, or finding alternate fittings to stay within OP limits which may be different from player ships. Bad when you see ships you don't want in your fleets, or loadouts with weapons you have excluded.

Here's a couple of possibilities:


- The ability to set a desired burn level for small / medium / large fleets. If you have Atlas selected as the only cargo hauler, the game won't put Atlas in fast medium-sized fleets. This could be a 'soft' setting as the ones currently in-game are.

- Instead of a 'none' and 'preferred' status for weapons and hulls, open this up to 3 settings. 'Forbidden', 'allowed' and 'preferred'. More control for the player, as well as the possibility of *** it up.

- Separate settings for trade fleets vs. combat fleets. I may want to stick a few Mules in a combat fleet, but make Prometheus or Atlas the mainstay of trade fleets.

- The ability to set and / or build preferred loadouts for fleet doctrine yourself. This could either be separate of, or it could replace the preferred weapon list completely.


If you have any others, feel free to post them. I don't expect these will make it into the game, as complexity for its own sake is not something Alex usually goes for. But maybe we'll dig up a nugget or two.

19

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9.1a-RC6] Autofire too careful around station

« on: May 12, 2019, 03:42:06 PM »

These images say it all I think. See the red warning markers on the reticules? What's it catching, the Gargoyles' circular flight path?

20

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9.1a-RC6] Pirate Intel does not expire

« on: May 12, 2019, 04:58:50 AM »

More of a QoL improvement than a bug, but in longer games this gets in the way. This doesn't seem to happen with Luddic Path bases.

21

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9.1a-RC6] Phase ships kill themselves on ally shields

« on: May 11, 2019, 06:05:53 AM »

I've had this happen in a fleet of Paragons and Afflictors. The Afflictors will sometimes stick too close to the Paragons, not respecting their shield bubble - and what it does to its own armour. This happens both when the Paragon raises shields and Afflictor doesn't back off to make room. As well as Afflictor decloaking into a Paragon's raised shields and rapidly killing its own armour & hull.

I don't think this is an issue with Afflictor in particular. We just see the escort AI cutting it too close with some shield bubbles and Afflictor is a prime suspect since it can get into ideal 'hugging' range in no time.

22

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9a RC10] Typical Heavy Patrol missing certain hulls

« on: April 22, 2019, 08:46:29 PM »

The other two bugs from the patrol visualizer are dealt with, but one I haven't seen mentioned: Certain blueprints may be selected in doctrine, but they don't show up in randomized Typical Heavy Patrols at all. So far I've found: Centurion, Xyphos, Brawler, Mining Pod Wing.

They also don't show up in the actual assembled fleets as far as I can tell.

23

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9a RC10] Ghost Stations

« on: November 22, 2018, 06:56:48 PM »

A pirate raid targets Port Tse and fights multiple battles with the station. But the battles happen nowhere near the station. Every time the fleets make a beeline for a point near the centre of the system and fight it out there.

It gets better: Catching a pirate fleet near that 'ghost point' allows the station to support me from all the way over there.

24

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9a RC10] Schwartz's Bag o' Bugs

« on: November 18, 2018, 01:58:29 PM »

Figured I'd open one of these for the lesser bugs I've found so far. May append the list. So far I have:


- When killing fleets, sometimes it appears the game can't find the right ships to restore so it offers a Neptune (D) or several. This happens with Remnants too. Fixed.

- When switching officers between 2 ships, the fleet screen will update the officers but the personality type stays the same. Re-entering the fleet screen makes it show up properly. [RC10]

- When fighting an expedition, a nearby fleet supported me. Then before they even spawned in combat, it said "Allied forces are now in full retreat!" They showed up for engagement #2 though. [happened in RC9]

- When having 2 colonies in the same system, they don't seem to import and export everything that they're able to. I waited a couple of months before I checked. Look at domestic goods and Organics. [happened in RC9]

- At the end of a long battle being seriously outnumbered. I came to the help of an ally. 6 ships on our side vs. two dozen pirates. Game gives me +10% ECM range. At the end of combat, I had at least 10 ships on the field and the enemy had 1 remaining. I am now at -10% ECM range. Last enemy dies, the penalty disappears. [happened in RC9]

- When switching your commander to another ship before battle, it doesn't seem to apply the ECM skill buff at all. I don't know about the other skills. [RC10]

- When an outlaw station is created in a system with a black hole, and some of those fleets end up getting too close to it, they aren't obliterated. No, they're just chilling there unable to pull free. They're also not too careful to avoid it. [RC10]

- Station defenders will often all gather around and prefer to face their own allied station for no good reason, making them easy pickings. [RC10]

25

Bug Reports & Support / [0.9a RC8] Autofit broken

« on: November 17, 2018, 09:20:54 PM »

If you have a ship with 2 HVRs and the fit you're trying to apply has 2 HVRs, selecting the fit will often replace these guns with something else.
If you have a fit with 2 HVRs and you have the guns in storage on your colony, selecting the fit will not draw from storage but put something else in its spot.

Autofit will also add Reinforced Bulkheads even if the option is off. This may account for the bad weapon choices.

All 4 sourcing options are selected, and 'strip before autofit' is too.

So far I've only noticed this happening in my colony.

26

Bug Reports & Support / [0.8.1a RC8] Battlestation as an ally

« on: July 27, 2017, 04:17:57 PM »

As I was dropping into a system full of remnant fleets to hunt down a bounty, I saw the bounty engaged in combat with a battlestation. I evaded two remnant fleets (they were on hostile and giving chase) and collided with the bounty. There, I was given the option to fight alongside the battlestation. Which I did. The battlestation was very well-behaved and acted like an ally. I was still sweating bullets flying past the thing, but anyway...

Sounds like a fringe case, but I was still surprised that these two pieces actually interacted. Also seeing how it's a death sentence for the pirate captain. Stations don't 'force' encounters the same way overlapping fleets do, do they?

27

Bug Reports & Support (modded) / [0.8.1a RC8] Ship & Weapon Pack: Forbidden mods can be installed

« on: July 27, 2017, 08:01:30 AM »

Using a Buffalo (A) and a Buffalo (P) as an example. The Skeleton Crew hullmod is unusable with the (P) variant, but you can create a variant from the (A) hull that includes the mod, then paste it onto a (P) hull. Not sure if this is a vanilla or a mod issue so here goes.

28

Bug Reports & Support (modded) / [0.8.1a RC8] [Console Commands?] Fatal: Number of remaining buffer elements is 0

« on: July 15, 2017, 11:45:06 AM »

Ran into this problem with a relatively fresh and clean modded game. The CTD occurred when I pressed Ctrl-Backspace to open the console. Using Console Commands 3.0 WIP 4.

Edit: Welp, looks like there's a fixed .jar file out for this. Disregard!


970759 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Number of remaining buffer elements is 0, must be at least 6787200. Because at most 6787200 elements can be returned, a buffer with at least 6787200 elements is required, regardless of actual returned element count
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Number of remaining buffer elements is 0, must be at least 6787200. Because at most 6787200 elements can be returned, a buffer with at least 6787200 elements is required, regardless of actual returned element count
   at org.lwjgl.BufferChecks.throwBufferSizeException(BufferChecks.java:162)
   at org.lwjgl.BufferChecks.checkBufferSize(BufferChecks.java:189)
   at org.lwjgl.BufferChecks.checkBuffer(BufferChecks.java:230)
   at org.lwjgl.opengl.GL11.glReadPixels(GL11.java:2450)
   at org.lazywizard.console.ConsoleOverlayInternal.show(Overlay.kt:55)
   at org.lazywizard.console.ConsoleOverlay.show(Overlay.kt:33)
   at org.lazywizard.console.ConsoleCampaignListener.advance(ConsoleCampaignListener.java:62)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

29

Suggestions / Fighters as Weapons: Fixing downside #1, granular orders

« on: May 21, 2017, 10:21:00 AM »

We pretty much knew what we were getting into with the new fighter mechanics. They're certainly usable now, but I see a problem with using them effectively. This goes for both the player and the AI.

Each carrier gets one target to either attack or defend.

Why is this bad? Because Piranhas and Talons don't want to attack the same frigate. Because all the different wings are effective against different things. Because bombers have no business guarding anything. You could argue that the guarded ship becomes a gather waypoint, and there is some benefit to afterwards having fighters and bombers move forward to a new target together. But this is more of an unintended upside to a restrictive system.

What do I suggest? Fighters are weapons now, so put them in dedicated weapon groups. Allow the player to select a weapon group, then click on a target. A second click could erase the order. The game could also automatically zoom out further than normal so the player can seamlessly give orders without a lot of pausing and mouse wheel use.

How does this suggestion keep unnecessary complexity in check? Because AI carriers will assign their own targets as they did before. With the upside of doing it more effectively. The only complexity from a player standpoint happens when the player himself pilots a carrier. And this is exactly when he wants to have that complexity.

Lastly: The target key is presently overburdened with function. You select a target for autofiring weapons, meaning it exists for your ship to know what to attack. And to have a measure of enemy flux, hull damage, weapons etc. That your target becomes the target of all fighters is an assumption that covers some cases reasonably, and others not so well.

Thoughts?

30

Bug Reports & Support / [0.8a RC19] Bounty fleets, double and triple spawns

« on: May 03, 2017, 03:48:17 AM »

Edit: Nevermind this one. I misread the intel tab and assumed two bounties were in different systems when they weren't.