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 / Re: Various small UI suggestions

« on: July 26, 2022, 01:25:15 PM »

I would like to be able to see target information even if I aren't currently deployed in a ship. I don't know why this was removed in the most recent version, but I disagree with the choice. Also when not deployed in a ship, if tabbing in and out of map view, to not have to show video feed (F) of one of my ships to not be have the view be blank space when exiting map view.

17

Suggestions / Re: Please remove the "per hull" production limit.

« on: July 26, 2022, 01:15:37 PM »

Far simpler than any complicated but still an arbitary and artificial rule is just to remove limits altogether. If someone wants to produce 100 mining lasers at once, I don't see a reason to prevent them from doing so. Likewise with 3 Onslaughts or whatever capital they want as long as they have the production.

18

Blog Posts / Re: The Pilgrim's Path

« on: July 26, 2022, 01:09:58 PM »

I was thinking, some of factions as they are currently are more of a reflection of current and past times than they are of the future, barring the spacefaring part. I consider the most fleshed out is the Hegemony, which appears to be characterised as different stereotypes to different people, from a bureaucratic nightmare to a military junta nightmare to an authoritarian nightmare, due to the unclear nature of what their government is, but they do host a cosmospolitan space university as well as seemingly independent planets within their borders. Persean League I would regard as the next, in that every planet is different, but there is nothing truly bizarre and whilst widely different, there is nothing there that seems out of the ordinary on Earth. The most outlandish seems to be a parody of current politics.

Tri-Tachyon is a bit odd, in that they are a corporation in space, but how would an actual government corporation function is not expounded upon, for where does the money go? Instead they are simply what appears to be when ina modern world corporate corruption runs rampant without humanist concerns or government oversight. For all that they are far less cruel than actual historical corporations that did end up ruling vast areas. Sindrian Diktat seems to be a bog standard recently formed military dictatorship with charismatic leader stereotype. At least from the point of view of the Hegemony anyways, which is the lens that is presented to the player.

Luddic Church is just a theocracy. That's it really. As a religion it is barely fleshed out, and doesn't seem to reflect any sort of grand futuristic or present idealogy, other than a vague  coldwar style hamans may cause the end of human civilization. It's just a religion, but in space. It doesn't really predict a possible religion or idealogy that will come as technology abnd science is gainedor reflect the growing idealogies of the modern world, such as the growing ecological movement. There doesn't seem to be any horrific cyborgs running around despite that appears to be one of the core tenents of the Luddic Church is fighting against. Everyone is vaguely human, with the odd bionic eye at the most. They seem to beleive in ecological balance, but they were formed at a time when the domain manipulated the climate of whole planets with seeming ease and the population of humans on a planet now doesn't reach a mere billion.

19

Suggestions / Re: Please remove the "per hull" production limit.

« on: July 25, 2022, 11:52:23 AM »

Historically speaking it was gear drives that were the limiting factor in ship production, and still is today, as gearing is practically produced individualised for a ship class and not as easily open to mass production methods.

Reasons can always be found to fit game mechanics and I don't see the purpose of the game mechanic of the limit. As it is, it doesn't really affect any of the games I've ever played as I never have enough heavy industry.

20

General Discussion / Re: How would you go about nerfing Eradicator (if needed)

« on: July 25, 2022, 11:30:52 AM »

... Ackchually, if AAF is considered to be a 30% boost in DPS, the identical defensive properties of the standard Eradicator must be considered. A ship that output twice as much damage is not twice as good afterall. Lanchester square law makes it square root 1.3 which should make the standard Eradictor 14% more than the pirate eradicator. So relatively speaking from 22 DP would be 19 DP. But that's a straight forward mathematical model. In starsector AAF allows a ship to frontload damage, retreat, vent and try again which makes AAF much better than such a simple mathematical analysis.

...

Lanchester's square law works in the opposite way that you applied it, a square rather than a square root. By that analysis (which doesn't take into account most things in SS like regenerating shields), a 30% increase in firepower is a 69% increase in effectiveness. I don't think this is accurate for SS, but its more accurate than taking the square root.

Not really, since Lanchester's law concerns itself if equal "strength" units which I had converted to "offence" and "defence" and concerns itself with differring numbers of equal strength units. But if that doesn't convince you, consider that a "unit" with double offence is not worth double cost of the original, and likewise a unit with double defence is not worth double cost of the original either. A unit that is now double offence and defence is not worth 4 times the original, but rather close to double. More due to granuality but lets ignore that.

What I am saying was that from a purely mathematical model point of view, a ship with 30% more offence is only worth 14% more DP, not 30%, and in any case out of the sim like conditions of where you force two opposing ships to burn into shooting range and doesn't attempt to manoeuvre, such mathematical analysis would not properly model the DP worth of starsector ships.

Anyhow, I quite like the Eagle, but the main problem is the mismatch of the weapons and turrets it has only puts it into a tend got a few configurations, either that of a short ranged SO build or of a longer ranged frigate killer. You can personally pilot the Eagle with builds like phase lance, but there are far more effective and easier to use cruisers to personally pilot, including the Eradictor itself. By the way, what planet stock the normal Eradicators? I can never seem to find them.

21

General Discussion / Re: How do you fight difficult battles ?

« on: July 24, 2022, 04:16:48 AM »

The obvious answer to how to fight battles is to actually fight the battles? Difficult or not doesn't change anything. Whether personally piloting or giving commands, both are highly effective and will give a massive difference to the course of the battle. I've played games where I've focused on either styles and there nothing that prevents you from doing both either as you can pause the game any time you like.

It really depends on the type of flagship you got. If you are commanding from a carrier then might as well set it to autopilot and give general orders from there, like getting PD ships to escort and so on. You will still need the command system and applicable use of it anyways when it comes to fighting rem ordo's.

The player flown combat ships and the like are much better though, and the AI cant appropriately use certain ships like Ody or Zeno so its worth it to learn how to pilot your own ship.

I would consider a carrier as the best choice of a personally piloting a ship if you don't have combat skills, outside of a capital or phase ship. It's is also very easy and lax on attention. Equip bomber type fighters, keep to about 2000 distance to be safe from most threats, but near enough for quick bombing runs, can be closer if you are more attentive or behind a line of blocking ships. Press Z to toggle fighter engage off, press R to target a ship and press Z again to choose the most opportune time to strike. This being when the missiles arrive, the target ship is under fire and about to withdraw as the AI doesn't seem to respond in time to bomber strikes. This, I find, is far more effective than any other style, short of phase ships or capitals for big battles. You don't even need the carrier player skills as you aren't taking repeated fighter losses.

The only thing you have to be wary of is to not get too close, say about 800 distance as that seems to muck up the bombing animation of some bombers. The closer you are the better, as your bombing rate greatly increases.

22

General Discussion / Re: How would you go about nerfing Eradicator (if needed)

« on: July 24, 2022, 03:40:26 AM »

Because pirate Eradicator is borderline overpowered at 17 DP the same way normal Eradicator is at 20 DP, for the same reasons (of powerful, easy-to-use turreted ballistic firepower).  If normal Eradicator gets a DP raise because 20 is too cheap, then 17 is also too cheap for pirate Eradicator.

Your prior reasoning was one of matching percentages of DP. I don't think the pirate eradicator is borderline overpowered at 17 DP, but I don't really mind if it was to be increased to 18 DP either.

IIRC when you include duty cycle AAF comes out to a ~35% increase in total firepower, which is flux free and concentrated at the start of an engagement in most cases. Burn drive has some value for fast hunter cruisers, but the effective flux/firepower advantage is significant.

Right. The fact that it can be used to start the engagement means that a roughly equivalent ship begins on its back foot and never really recovers. The effect this has on the AI is substantial, so much so that it can mean the difference between squeaking out a win (Pirate Eradicator) and not taking any damage at all (standard).

If AAF is considered ~30% boost in DPS, then the standard Eradicator should be about 30% more expensive to field than the Pirate version. Unsurprisingly, this is 22 relative to 17. That's a bit of an oversimplification, of course, but Burn Drive doesn't have the same battlefield impact as AAF by a large margin, in my opinion, at least not on a ship with 70 base speed. You could make an argument that AAF on a Dominator wouldn't necessarily be "better" (I still think it might be) but the Dominator's slow base speed necessitates Burn Drive a lot more than the Eradicator does.

Ackchually, if AAF is considered to be a 30% boost in DPS, the identical defensive properties of the standard Eradicator must be considered. A ship that output twice as much damage is not twice as good afterall. Lanchester square law makes it square root 1.3 which should make the standard Eradictor 14% more than the pirate eradicator. So relatively speaking from 22 DP would be 19 DP. But that's a straight forward mathematical model. In starsector AAF allows a ship to frontload damage, retreat, vent and try again which makes AAF much better than such a simple mathematical analysis.

Maybe nerf the logistical side of it? We could bring it down to burn 8 instead of burn 9.

Logistical changes does not affect combat balance. Especially in this case changing burn speed essentially changes the entire worth of a ship. Burn speed is how I would internally classify ships as fleet speed is the single most important game interaction. Hence in my view how the Eradicators pretty much make every other direct combat destroyer obsolete. I would say both Eradicators should be burn 8, but that is very much detrimental towards me.

23

Blog Posts / Re: The Pilgrim's Path

« on: July 24, 2022, 03:24:21 AM »

@Neldonax
You act like harassing the developers over artistic decisions means caring about the game, but in fact you’re just demanding that the devs care about you. Buying the game is just you appreciating a product, it does not entitle you to make demands on its creators. If you care so much about the game that you want to improve it, take your free time and make an artwork or a mod. Better yet, buy the game to friends who might like it. But if you want Starsector to be your own thing, go on, the devs kindly left the tools available.

How exactly is he harrassing the developers? He is typing out posts in the developers own forum, using said forum to its purpose, to give an opinion. The developer holds all the power here, and can can silence him at will if Alex chooses to do so. Harrassment this is not. I sure hope the developer cares for all our opinions, and indeed has been responsive to complaints and open to discussions in the past. If you truly think the developer does not care, then why even have a forum and why would you be posting in said forum about the direction of the game?

24

General Discussion / Re: How do you use battlecruisers properly?

« on: July 22, 2022, 01:06:26 PM »

Ignoring using the battlecruisers as player piloted, after long experimentation, I find the best way to use AI controlled battlecruisers effectively is to base a whole fleet out of them at least in regard to the Conquest. Other ships must be at least as fast or carriers, so they can be mutually supporting of each other, able to hide behind each other, as opposed to being left behind or dashing too far ahead. The fleets weakness is when facing weapons which bypass it's small shield arc hitting its very wide body length, but is otherwise very adaptable. For this purpose, a symmetrical loadout is best as the AI is actually very good about flipping over to the more armoured side with the working weapons, esentially doubling your armour and reducing weapon repair downtime.

For player controlled anything goes really including the very boring Gauss cannon build, which really isn't a good use of the player's strength.

25

General Discussion / Re: How would you go about nerfing Eradicator (if needed)

« on: July 22, 2022, 12:52:58 PM »

I don't see why should the DP cost of the Pirate Eradicator be bumped up, if the DP cost of the Normal Eradicator is bumped up. If Normal Eradicator is worth 22 instead of 20, and Pirate Eradicator is worth 17, then what's the point of bumping pirate Eradicator to 18 simply because Normal Eradictors cost has been bumped? They are essentially two different ships with two different worthiness. Reflecting ones' worthiness in DP does not change the other.

17 is uncomfortable to see though. Perhaps we can have more ships with prime numbers to make us more comfortable. 37 DP battlecruiser anyone?

26

Suggestions / Re: Shrike as bounty hunter starter ship instead of Wolf

« on: July 22, 2022, 12:43:03 PM »

Wolf seems fine to me as a starter ship. As I do play with the small start and skip the tutorial, I wouldn't really want to have it replaced with any other 4/5 DP frigate, at least not without a choice to choose. It is relatively fast and is the ship that comes with a failsafe in the form of the phase skimmer which makes it friendly for new players. It only does poorly once you are facing large fleets with cruisers, but that is the case for all non-specialised 4/5 DP costed frigates. If there is something about the wolf that needs improvement, it is only that its turn speed is suprisingly awful especially considering that its main weapon is fixed, which can cause a lot of shots to miss, especially if using a heavy blaster..

27

Blog Posts / Re: The Pilgrim's Path

« on: July 22, 2022, 12:30:54 PM »

Lovely to see the Luddic Church get some attention, especially in regards to reconcile the apparent technology hating aspect we see with Pathers and the fact that they are an interstellar civilisation afterall. I rather like the depiction of the churches, I was expecting a very 40k inspired look and got pleasantly suprised by something else. In real life, religious buildings such as churches were at the forefront of monumental architecture of their time, though in the Luddics case it seems to only merely be at the forefront of style. Though it seems in the case of the interiors it is very 40k inspired. Though in real life (tm) catholic churches are actually full of masses of candles, though many do replace candles with electronic candles nowadays.

No, I really don't want to look out for cliffracers anymore. In the case with how Morrowing handles religion, I had always thought the intention is of a Thus spake Zarathustra styled parody of how bizarre and contradictory religious text looks to outlanders outsiders complete with written religious text techniques.

28

Suggestions / Re: Freelancer option

« on: March 09, 2020, 08:34:27 AM »

The freelancer mount and blade mod is one of my favorites, it allows the player to join an npc army (or fleet in this case). I think it would work amazingly in starsector as well. This could add a nice early game option and a new rp path. You could slowly earn creds, experience, relation with the admiral, and relation with the faction. As you level up you might have the option to upgrade your ship hull and loadout. You could rise through the ranks of your faction, and perhaps eventually be offered your own command.

Most of this already kind of happens if you take a commission with a faction. You can do this by talking with a station commander or similar characters on the colony screen. You get regular payment, payment for destroying enemies, and your relationship improves rapidly from such. You gain the ability to buy ships and weapons from the miltary market depending on reputation. The only thing missing is being offered your own command, but that wouldn't gel right with starsector. Aiding a faction in another fight without a commission increases relation with that faction as well.

29

Suggestions / Re: Paying pursuing fleets to leave you alone

« on: March 09, 2020, 08:05:35 AM »

just dont go to the luddic church or luddic path, both of em do that

The Luddic Church does not ask for payment. They act the same as any other normal faction.

30

Suggestions / Re: Shield colour based on flux capacity

« on: March 09, 2020, 08:04:14 AM »

Perhaps thin lines that emanate from the edge of the shield radially facing inwards that lengthens the more flux the shield has.