Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hyperspace Topography (10/12/22)

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 - Serenitis

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 90
Suggestions / Re: Can we please have a "ban" option for blueprints
« on: October 17, 2022, 09:27:01 AM »
Player: "Look, I've been to every corner of the sector and learned basically every blueprint it is possible to learn, could you just stop building Buffaloes please?"

Shipyard Admin: "lmao. No."

General Discussion / Re: Skills and the Major problem with them.
« on: October 15, 2022, 01:23:22 AM »
I'm hot garbage at combat, but I still take combat skills because they:
  • Make it easier to do stuff in combat
  • "Raise the bar" for mistakes so fewer bad plays have a harshly negative effect
  • Regardless of how bad I am, zooming about shooting stuff is fun

You(OP) have this completely backwards. It's the QoL/Industry skills that are "trash".
Just because something gives you <power x> instead of <power y> doesn't make it "useless" or "a trap".
It's just different priorities. Logistics power is still power.
Any skill that does not directly benefit either your fleet or your flagship in combat is technically worthless
Repairing ships for nothing, recovering CR faster, not being affected by certain things, and just straight up not needing as many of your 30 ships to be support. All because not only can your existing ships carry more stuff, but all your ships use less stuff so you can skew your fleet even harder toward combat ships without impacting it's range or speed.
This all benefits your fleet and flagship. Even if some of it is indirect, it's still a benefit.

General Discussion / Re: anyone else despise the buoy mechanics?
« on: October 02, 2022, 02:18:34 AM »
I don't particularly like objectives either.
The way I've found myself playing to minimise how much I have to care about them is to only ever deploy my flagship first.
Then immediately press G to bring up the reinforcement panel, and check how much of my fleet I can use immediately.

If it's all of it (or near enough) I can safely ignore all objectives, camp the bottom of the screen and wait for the opposing force to show up in numbers so I can instantly surround them, remove a few and go from there.

If it's "not enough" I can take the flagship solo and cap the nearest objective that gives more DP and wait for opposition to show up, remove as many as I can until it's not viable anymore then call in as many reinforcements as I can, fall back and and forget about objectives for the rest of the battle.

This also has the advantage of me no longer having to sit in dumb traffic jams because a tiny piece of space dust exists near the entry point.

Modding / Re: Crew QOL/cargo usage mod?
« on: October 02, 2022, 01:57:30 AM »
Maybe this?

Not a mod I use personally as it seems like busywork/micromanagement for the sake of it.

Discussions / Re: Slipways
« on: October 02, 2022, 01:28:17 AM »
It's so frustrating because all the things that stop you from being successful, are your own fault!
You're not just playing against the game, you're playing against yourself.
If nothing else, Slipways forces you to face your own inadequacies.

My best score so far is ~22k: 5 Gold stars + 2 Blue.
Can't get that consistently tho.

I've found one of the best things that helps me is turning on the "sticky help keys" in the settings.
This allows you to press right-alt to toggle the input/output overlays for all discovered planets.
And left-alt toggles the mouseover connection markers.

Discussions / Slipways
« on: September 30, 2022, 04:54:45 AM »
So, after yet more medical nonsense I've found myself wanting a bit of distraction without needing a lot of concentration/effort.
And I found a gem that I'd never heard of before called Slipways.

The premise is you're taking Humanity to the stars under the collective 'wing' of five older races.
You pick an area to colonise and then 3 out of the 5 races as advisors, then you all get sent via wormhole to this undeveloped area.

The game itself is an economic/logistics puzzle, with each planet having inputs it needs to fucntion, and outputs that feed other planets.
And the whole thing is linked together by the titular Slipways - which are straight line point-to-point connections than can't cross or go through things.
As you play your advisors will give you tasks based on which 'gimmick' they are based on. So you might get asked to find x number of new planets by the explorer guy, or produce y amount of research output by the science guy etc.
And then you do your best to make all your planets as prosperous as possible within 25 years, at the end of which you're given a score.

It's HARD.
Like legitimately confounding at first. It took me a while to 'get' that there's always a stable loop of inputs and outputs at the start, it's just sometimes hard to find in the ocean of possibilites.
But as you play it starts making sense, and you start noticing all these weird little quirks that can be exploited everywhere (by design).
And each advisor race gives you access to various technologies you can research to give you new abilities, or sometimes change the rules. And sometimes break them entirely.

I'm terrible at it, but I can't leave it alone.
This game owns p. hard.
And it has some of the most chill music I've heard in ages.

Would recommend, especially if you're looking for something a bit more on the relaxing side.

Suggestions / Re: Allow Restore to Remove Individual D-Mods
« on: September 29, 2022, 01:32:13 AM »
Iirc, the d-mods giving such a noticeable reduction to recovery costs is exactly because you have to deal with them all, or either scrap/repair the ship.

Originally I was really keen on this premise, because fixing stuff one broken thing at a time is exactly how you do it when you have no money.
It makes sense. And getting rid of stuff you don't like & keeping stuff you don't care about for the savings seems p. cool.
But playing through a few (dozen) games trying to deliberately use d-mods has given me the realisation that they don't really matter as much as some would insist.
To be honest the only d-mod worth caring about at all is "Ill Advised" which isn't random.
And being able to cherry-pick that away from the ships that have it would just make them strictly better than any other option in thier respective class.

While it would be nice to be able to pick and choose, you'd have to reduce the positive effects from d-mods to balance it.
Doing that would remove a big part of what makes d-mod fleets work - being able to use bigger & more expensive ships earlier, or just more ships in general.
And I don't think that's worth the trade off.

General Discussion / Re: Why am i profitably exporting for 0$?
« on: September 26, 2022, 11:44:08 PM »
Income is multiplied by market share, and since you have 0% share from that colony it generates no income.
When you add the guy with IP that gives you an extra product to export which pushes your share up so your income is no longer multiplied by zero, but by a small number.

The more stuff you make in the same place, the bigger the slice of the market you control, the more money you get from both selling the goods AND the higher the multiplier applied to that income.

General Discussion / Re: New/rebalanced ship variants?
« on: September 25, 2022, 10:57:00 AM »
One pirate ship I am not fond of is pirate Wolf.  It is pure downgrade (fewer mounts, nerfed system), and the 4 DP cost is not enough compensation.
They're just too fragile to not have some kind of PD for their exposed rear.
And any other variant is easy enough to find that it's never worth using the (P) version.

If Wolf had an omni shield, this would be less of an issue (and would make it a bit more survivable in general).

I would not want Industrial Planning replaced or removed from the game unless baseline commodity production is raised by one or baseline demand lowered by one across the board.
You wouldn't need to do either if you went down the expanded skills route.
Keep IP as-is for the player and alphas.
Every other admin in the game gets an array of 'lesser' skills that only boost either a single resource or a single industry.

This has the added bonus of being able to include all colony stats, and maybe some spicy tradeoffs.
Like a less than reputable skill that gives a good boost to something but takes a bite out of stability or income.
Or military/militia skills that boost fleet size/count, or defences.

Dozens of potential skills, hundreds of potential combinations.
If you really wanted, you could even include a leveling system for admins that gain them skills based on the kind of colony they're running / what buildings are present / what things are active etc.

General Discussion / Re: So there was a rant about the doritos
« on: September 14, 2022, 11:49:51 AM »
I think this depends on whether Tessaract is supposed to be faced by every player going through the story, or be a challenge reserved for players looking for one.
This is very important, as far as design decisions go.
Do you make extra-hard content mandatory, or optional?

In every game, at least half of your player base is at or below median skill level. Making hard content mandatory effectively locks those people out of anything beyond that point.
While some may argue that making hard content optional diminishes the experience.
It's basically the same argument as "should there be an easy mode?", just with a slightly different framing.

Being firmly in the lower half of the demographics, I favour permissive systems and optionality.
I've tried to mess with geometry a few times, not got anywhere, and because I don't have the interest, the patience or the time to bounce my head against a problem until a solution pops out any more, I'm content to leave them be and let other players have all the fun they like with them. It's just not for me.
If I were forced to engage with this at some point, I would likely be considerably less content.

Mora and heron are ships that I've found work a lot better for me if I ignore what I want them to be, and instead focus on what they are.
They don't play by the same rules. They're square blocks in a fleet full of triangle holes.

Incredibly subjective rambling:
Mora is definitely, 100% a battle carrier.
Its a brick and it can just sit there and ignore a lot of things.
The problem with Mora, it that its flux stats are also a brick. So putting 'good' guns on it is a waste of time, as it will just flux itself up and spend a lot of time not firing those guns - in addition to using the damper field, where it is also not using those guns.

Instead cover it in PD. A vulcan facing in every direction, a couple of machine guns on the wide front mounts and a single mortar in the narrow mount.
(Ignore the hardpoint - it is a silly thing.)
Fighters and missiles can be absolutely anything.
Stack defensive hullmods, and seriously consider unstable injector for a bit of extra speed.
With this setup there is no need for vents as weapon flux is less than base dissipation, so any left over OP can put into caps for more shield health.

Example 1 - To get in faces and just be everybody's problem:

Example 2 - To lurk afar and support from a distance:

(With all those caps, you could swap some out for campaign stuff. Or ditch the injector as its not super important in that role...)
Heron probably isn't a battle carrier.
It's too squishy. Has mediocre flux stats. And not enough OP.
But it has an absolutely bangin' ship system.

To take advantage of this is Heron's purpose.
And to do that, it needs to compromise everything else.
Fit one PD laser on each wing, and a single tac laser on the nose.
And then most importantly put a guided missile in the medium mount. Doesn't matter what, but the longer the range / the faster the better.
It's not going to be close enough to anything to use unguided / slow missiles effectively.
Heron can't handle guns. It doesn't have the flux stats to support them without spending all its OP on flux stuff. Why would you spend all your OP on trying to turn it into a mediocre combatant instead of being a good carrier?

Now, decide what you want it to do. And fit the hardest hitting fighters you can afford that do that thing. (With the caveat that guided weapons hit a lot more consistently than unguided, and can pass over friendlies.)
The only fighters to avoid are support types, as again Heron isn't going to be close enough to get much out of them and the system won't do much for thier weapons.

Sometimes the AI fluffs the system timing. So what?
It gets it right often enough to be worth taking advantage of. Can't say I've had any issues with it so far.

Example 1 - I will find a way to use Trident even if kills you repeatedly:

(You can also fit triple-dagger, but then you lose the kinetic/flare support. If you've got that covered elsewhere then stacking bombers to get more out of the system is good.)

Example 2 - The chaos engine:

General Discussion / Re: Tech-mining for Domain artifacts
« on: September 08, 2022, 12:41:28 AM »
Tech mining is incredibly capricious when it comes to output.
The size of the ruins improves the chances of getting something 'big', but doesn't guarantee it at all.
It's usually worth mining any size ruin.
And it's always worth running the mines until they say there's nothing there - I've seen tech mines pull colony items out of ruins that were almost entirely dead.

It's basically Starsector: Gacha.

General Discussion / Re: Tech-mining for Domain artifacts
« on: September 07, 2022, 07:02:45 AM »
You'll get far more from surveying and salvaging then tech-mining, ultimately.
Ultimately, this.
If you explore an entire sector you can almost guarantee you'll get a full set of items (or very close).
Tech Mining is comparatively lacklustre because on the whole it's output seems to be very very capricious, and non-interactively time consuming.

But maybe it is worth borrowing an idea from another part of the game to provide some potential shortcuts?

Domain derelicts sometimes have snippets of information that point to other derelicts.
Maybe ruins and abandoned stations could have a similar thing that points to useful items. (Possibly a specific thing, maybe just "something of value".)
That would send people to the approximate locations of things so they don't have to sweep the entire sector.

Not entirely sure how well that would mesh with the drop tables though.

Suggestions / Re: Ship restoration expanded information on flaws
« on: September 07, 2022, 01:07:03 AM »
An alternative (potentially easier) way of doing this would be to add it to the cost/confirmation box that appears.
Possibly something like:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 90