Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hostile Activity (09/01/22)

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 - Soda Savvy

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Suggestions / Re: ECM redesign.
« on: April 16, 2021, 01:17:09 PM »
I just feel like having it affect recoil state would fit better than the current range method. The range method is causing various ai issues, while having it affect spread would still let one engage at range, just to a lesser degree. One could handwave it away as 'Increasing the fire saturation pattern' or something.

An added bonus would be that it would mean more for frigates, as they have an easier time evading incoming volleys, while larger ships benefit less. Sure, a few rounds might miss that capital ship, but it's already so large and close that it's going to soak most of the incoming fire anyway.

That Wolf or Scarab meanwhile can slip between shots.


17
Suggestions / ECM redesign.
« on: April 16, 2021, 10:43:59 AM »
So from what I've gathered, a current issue with ECM is that it's easy for one fleet to just overwhelm the other and in turn mess up the ai, making them not want to press the attack.

What if instead of reducing the weapon ranges, ECM increased the default 'Recoil' state of all applicable weapons.

That way at max range said weapons could still miss, but the closer ships get the less effect it has.

Beam weapons, I don't know about. If you're in ballistic range, lasers aren't going to miss. Maybe a 10% damage reduction to simulate trouble seeking weakpoints.

18
General Discussion / Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
« on: April 13, 2021, 05:04:11 PM »
The Doom is boring to play specifically because of all of those things. With the Afflictor you at least have to do some planning for a fun fight.


19
General Discussion / Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
« on: April 13, 2021, 04:26:25 PM »
Apogee is clearly a 3/5/3/5/4. Doom's overrated, it's just an Afflictor with a 'Press F to blow things up' button.

And how are some of the frigates so high on Sustained when frigates run out of PPT so fast?


No Prometheus MK2?

20
Suggestions / Re: SO nerf/rebalance
« on: April 03, 2021, 12:23:31 PM »
What if SO was a ship system, or even a limited use toggle separate from the regular ship systems? War Emergency Power but for starships.

21
General Discussion / Re: Complaints about CR and game design
« on: April 01, 2021, 07:27:41 PM »
Jumping in to say that I personally like the logistics side of the game a lot. Having a supply chain and upkeep costs and plotting out expeditions is fun for me, as is budgeting what I can get away with in terms of the combat to wear and tear ratio. Traveling through the outer reaches of the sector is also fun, though I feel deep space could use more out there at times.

I also like that CR exists in the battles themselves, because thematically it makes sense for ships going full blast at each other to wear out over time, and mechanically acts as a counter to certain annoyances(Like the infinitely kiting tiny ship).

I do however think it could be toned back for the actual deployment costs a bit, as well as what causes it to drop.

Ships in real life that jump to red alert, or do combat drills, etc, don't suddenly take a capability hit once the action is over unless something has gone genuinely wrong.  Maybe if CR degradation outside of a small amount was instead focused on the ships that were actually in the thick of the action?

22
Steam has its fair share of issues in regards to finding games, but at the same time, I feel it's just like finding a good book on Amazons store(or any other store). You have to seek the thing out yourself if the author hasn't done any or enough advertising(or if you just haven't seen it yourself). My steam game ignore list is several thousand long(And the thing is, it's not just garbage I ignore, but also otherwise good games that I personally do not care for), but the wishlist is already several paychecks long.

I couldn't play all the games on the wishlist in a year even if I just bought them all, and they're quality games.

The problem is sheer volume, and because of that I personally could not, would not fault Alex for taking any theoretical deal that would set him and his team up for financial stability when they would otherwise be(and sort of are) playing the role of an apple in an olympic  scale bobbing for apples match. It would be incredibly entitled to think otherwise.

It would not however, in the case of Epic specifically, make me want to actually continue playing the game if their launcher with its array of security issues and general kludgery became the only way to access the game. I say this as a Phoenix Point backer, and we all know how that went.

23
If the patterns are man made, (ships cast hyperspace clearing 'wakes' perhaps, apply over decades) then it looks pretty interesting.

If it's supposed to be rotating, then what the heck is it orbiting.

If it's natural, I'm guessing stars cast a gravity shadow into hyperspace and clear it out?

In the event that the clouds could be made to move, would the engine be able to support them flowing across the map and around systems like a river?

24
General Discussion / Re: Fighter Rework and Missiles.
« on: October 17, 2016, 02:19:20 PM »
Here's a way to make regenerating missiles work: Make up a fancy blackbox system that can spit missiles out over an extended period of time(90 second+ for the absolute shortest), but for it to even start to work, you have to have hard flux to funnel into the generator. Pretend it's a 'flux lathe' or something that needs higher levels of power than most ships can generate normally without rolling systems blackouts. The more you get hit, the faster it can assemble missiles, up to the base time limit. So otherwise construction would either be glacial, or completely stopped.

But it gives you incentive to keep the fight going.


25
I'd prefer that the option for both high and low and even no skill runs stay in, even if only as a pregame toggle. Both methods are equally fun for me, and having one permanently crippled just sounds like the old 'stop having fun guys' argument.

Even more to the point, I like the feeling of change, as it goes from the careful jousting of the early game, to the frenetic brawling of the lategame. The biggest problem for me though is that even with mods, it's hard to get enemy fleets that can present an equivalent challenge against me. Templar fleets can only go so far after all, and those are from a mod.



26
General Discussion / Re: Afflictor is the new Hyperion
« on: April 12, 2016, 10:09:28 AM »
I find that Scarab's and Atropos missiles make great Afflictor counters. Main problem is finding any.

I do like fighting the things though. It's fun.

27
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: April 11, 2016, 12:52:14 PM »
One could go the full realism route and have all the lasers be invisible, with nothing but giant explosions and geysers of vaporized metal at the impact points depending on beam strength.

And the particle weapons act like trans continental flame throwers.

Maybe, however, add in a 'Pulse laser' variant, like from battletech? Those always had a nice deal of variety.


That does bring up an idea though; A Plasma lance, that acts like a beam, but has a chance to ignore high flux shields, and when it does it flamethrowers the entire inside of the shield bubble. Ship turns into a glowing sphere until the shield overloads, low level energy damage across everything.

But that's heading into the 'too much work' silly area.

28
General Discussion / Re: New teaser from Alex' tweeter.
« on: March 31, 2016, 02:53:51 PM »
All of the skulls hidden in the terrain are pretty cool.

29
Mods / Re: [0.7.2a] Starsector+ 3.3.0
« on: March 25, 2016, 05:52:07 PM »
They do? Then I must be completely missing them.  :-\



30
Mods / Re: [0.7.2a] Starsector+ 3.3.0
« on: March 25, 2016, 05:44:03 PM »
Instead of making it less fun to gain an IBB ship or making them more obnoxious to use(Though that Mis-Phased Travel Drive idea is cool), why not make them more challenging to capture instead?

How receptive is the game to things like multi stage fights?

Ex: You can fight the IBB fleet as normal, but if you take too long combat stress breaks certain systems on the ships and the flagship gets scrapped at the end of the fight as normal. But if you do too much damage to the fleet too fast, the ship bugs out and you have to chase them down. Maybe they can slow you down with 'mines' or something on the system map, represented by being unable to move for a short time while your ships 'clear the mines'. Like a longer sensor sweep delay. Either way, one to four(or any appropriate number) more rounds of this with perhaps some hunting around at markets for info(or even having to radio other fleets?) to find the target each time, and you get a final fight with the option to board the thing. Assuming you keep it alive of course.

Of course, that's a particularly... Involved way of solving that issue. I have no idea on how difficult it would be to make. It would also play murder on the cost to reward to expenses ratio. But then, kill the fleet slow and get the cash, play the quest and get the shiny ship.


Unrelated question: Bomb pumped lasers; Possible in this game? A slowish large torpedo that flies out, then once it lines up, detonates and sends a very high damage low lifespan laser towards the center of the nearest target, or whichever's targeted.

Pages: 1 [2] 3