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.

1

Suggestions / Re: Decrease High Scatter Amplifier OP cost down to 3/5/7/10

« on: April 13, 2024, 11:56:11 AM »

Sure, let's nerf it until it's in the same group with shield shunt and HSA - technically in the game but not actually used.

Hullmods that benefit specific weapons/loadouts need to be strong enough to actually open up new build options. If you nerf s-mags, it will only become even more of "only ever use when you had this type of build to begin with", or even "never use at all".

2

Suggestions / Re: Decrease High Scatter Amplifier OP cost down to 3/5/7/10

« on: April 13, 2024, 07:32:13 AM »

S-mags is exactly where s-mods should be. It's not gamebreaking or an auto-pick on any ship, but it's good enough to create entirely new builds around itself.

HSA is nowhere close, and it needs to be more powerful, not cheaper.

3

General Discussion / Re: Any way to disable the "change of sound" when using Fortress Shield?

« on: April 12, 2024, 05:31:41 AM »

I made a backup with CTRL + C then CTRL + V in the same folder

Might be the reason it didn't work. The game doesn't load files based on their names, it loads everything in the folder, and you now have two files defining the same system with the same ID. The unmodified one seemingly loads later and simply overwrites the changed one.
Move the backup outside of your starsector\data folder or any of its subfolders.

4

Blog Posts / Re: Save/Load UI, Autosave, Intel Map Markers, and More

« on: April 11, 2024, 04:51:52 AM »

Great stuff, no doubt about it.

The text entry field is pre-selected, and you can immediately type in a description, then press Enter twice – once to finish text entry, and again to save.

Would suggest making it one enter click instead of two. That's how it works in most games, and there doesn't seem to be much of anything else to do on that screen anyway, so deselecting the text field without closing it feels very niche.

5

General Discussion / Re: Any way to disable the "change of sound" when using Fortress Shield?

« on: April 07, 2024, 05:18:27 AM »

starsector-core\data\shipsystems\fortressshield.system

Code

"soundFilterType":"LOWPASS",
	"soundFilterGain":0.75,
	"soundFilterGainHF":0.0,

Can probably just remove the whole block. Make a backup, just in case.

6

General Discussion / Re: Modifying ships HELP! Want moer fighters.

« on: April 05, 2024, 11:42:02 AM »

The number of bays is defined in ship_data.csv, not heron.ship.

7

General Discussion / Re: Does anything genuinely benefit from the existence of story points and s-mods?

« on: April 03, 2024, 12:33:37 AM »

If retreat battles are dull and unfair, the solution is to rework them, not handwave the issue away with green points.

If certain ships can't function without s-mods, the solution is to buff them, not handwave the issue away with green points.

If leveling up officers and getting the skillsets you want takes too long and is too RNG dependent, the solution is to rebalance it, not handwave the issue away with green points.

That's the main meta-issue with story points. They are band-aids masking design and balance flaws within the game.

8

General Discussion / Re: Does anything genuinely benefit from the existence of story points and s-mods?

« on: April 02, 2024, 10:58:48 PM »

based on what the tooltip says on the character creation screen, Starsector is designed (or being designed) with ironman play in mind, right?

It absolutely isn't, and Alex doesn't seem to understand ironman games at all. Playing Starsetor ironman is definitely doable (I do it myself too), but it's an undeniably a much worse experience than playing it with saves or playing a properly designed ironman game.

9

Mods / Re: [0.97a] Industrial.Evolution 3.3.e - Campaign content expansion

« on: April 02, 2024, 04:37:17 AM »

My question is, is that "automated ship" even implemented yet?

It's not some new ship, the station generates a random existing hull type and slaps the super-automated ship tag onto it 10% of the time. The same one Sentinel AI ships use in vanilla. So you can get an automated Conquest, an automated Gremlin, etc.

10

Mods / Re: [0.97a] Industrial.Evolution 3.3.e - Campaign content expansion

« on: April 01, 2024, 03:30:09 PM »

Could you please elaborate? Is that actually a 10% chance? Is it in any way affected by the type/quality/size of the ships I'm sacrificing?

Yes, it's flat 10% on every roll, there are no ways to manipulate the chance.
Ships you sacrifice don't matter, only the DP of sacrifices does. The shipyard generates a random ship that costs less DP than the combined sacrifices. So if you want smaller ships, don't sacrifice too much at once. Again, none of this has any effect on the chance of getting an automated ship.
When you do get an automated ship, it can be cloned using the hull deconstructor / hull forge, and the copies will also be automated.

11

General Discussion / Re: Alabaster drop manipulation

« on: March 29, 2024, 12:57:15 PM »

You will always get the large they have mounted

This isn't true either. It's possible to kill 2 tesseracts and only get 1 large weapon out of it.

12

General Discussion / Re: 0.97 IR Pulse Laser Thread

« on: March 28, 2024, 09:57:27 AM »

The OP cost of the hullmod is offset by the fact that tac lasers are 4 OP, while IR pulses are 5. With enough small slots you barely pay anything extra.

HSA tac lasers have better range and better flux efficiency. The difference is significant. The downside is lower DPS/slot, but with so many small slots it becomes irrelevant.

13

General Discussion / Re: 0.97 IR Pulse Laser Thread

« on: March 28, 2024, 09:50:21 AM »

So bunch of small energy mounts, zero mediums and then a couple of large energies so that it makes low flux weapons more desirable.

This is actually the exact list of requirements for IR pulse to NOT be good, because it gets outcompeted by HSA tac lasers, just like it does on Odyssey.

The main use case is ships like Fury/Aurora. So 1-2 mediums, no larges, and a small amount of smalls. You tend to rely on heavy blaster for primary damage on ships like these, and IR pulses pair nicely with it, providing better flux efficiency against shields and anti-fighter coverage.

If a ship has a lot of mediums, you use one of them for anti-fighter and don't need IR pulses. If a ship has a lot of smalls, tac lasers become more efficient.

14

General Discussion / Re: 0.97 IR Pulse Laser Thread

« on: March 28, 2024, 09:29:43 AM »

They are fine, I use them regularly. It could be buffed, or it could stay the same. Either way, the weapon has a niche it's used in, and won't become a default choice for every ship unless you quadruple the damage or something silly like that.

If you halve the flux cost, I will still use them on the same ships I use them on now, and still won't start using them on other ships.

15

Suggestions / Re: Quick hullmod suggestion to boost small energies

« on: March 28, 2024, 02:51:11 AM »

IR pulse has perfect accuracy, no recoil, and a fast projectile. It's an anti-fighter and anti-frigate gun, not a LDAC equivalent in any way.