Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 40

Author Topic: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 355117 times)

Carabus

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #450 on: March 05, 2016, 09:10:38 PM »

Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #451 on: March 05, 2016, 09:56:38 PM »

Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.

This means you don't have any price information for it.
Logged

Carabus

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #452 on: March 05, 2016, 10:36:25 PM »

Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.

This means you don't have any price information for it.

But I have: http://prntscr.com/absmkn
Unless you mean there is nothing to show on the map, but in one of the test games I started I remember the map was "empty" for some commodities, and despire that they still had the entry in Prices list.


Anyway another possible oversight I found:
Ragnar is called Red Giant, but its description fits Red Dwarf type star, especially when it mentions that its mass is only a fraction of old sun mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification#Class_M
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #453 on: March 05, 2016, 10:38:49 PM »

But I have: http://prntscr.com/absmkn
Unless you mean there is nothing to show on the map, but in one of the test games I started I remember the map was "empty" for some commodities, and despire that they still had the entry in Prices list.

The map only shows information that you get from reports due to prices being noteworthy for some reason; that's what I meant here. The other thing sounds like it could be a bug, I'll keep an eye out.

Anyway another possible oversight I found:
Ragnar is called Red Giant, but its description fits Red Dwarf, especially when it mentions that its mass is only a fraction of old sun mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification#Class_M

Yeah, it's definitely supposed to be a red dwarf - I've actually got a todo item about that somewhere :)
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #454 on: March 06, 2016, 10:17:30 AM »

A few random comments:

Just stumbled upon the new orbital mirror painting, it is beautiful! (Once again I wish I could enlarge it in-game.)

The new phase system is an enormous improvement. Back when the original phase invisibility plans were cancelled I was kind of disappointed, and since then I always regarded the transparency mechanics as a less cool substitute. Not anymore! The ships are a blast to fly, and really interesting to fight against.

I like all the balance changes and new ship systems I've encountered so far. All the time shenanigans are awesome. High Energy Focus is a really good system now (it was slightly annoying before).

For the first time I've actively engaged in campaign level stealth gameplay. I had as much fun as in an interesting fight, it was really intense. That's why I think the game could stand more reasons to enter markets undetected besides smuggling, like spy missions . (I only started being sneaky because I wanted to scout all black markets for phase ships, even those of enemy factions.)


Oh, and thank you for the new intel tab. It's not perfect, but so far from the headache inducing wirrwarr from before.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #455 on: March 06, 2016, 10:22:24 AM »

For the first time I've actively engaged in campaign level stealth gameplay. I had as much fun as in an interesting fight, it was really intense. That's why I think the game could stand more reasons to enter markets undetected besides smuggling, like spy missions . (I only started being sneaky because I wanted to scout all black markets for phase ships, even those of enemy factions.)

Very much on the same page here! Spy-type missions are actually on the todo somewhere; I'd love to have more things encouraging stealth gameplay.

Oh, and thank you for the new intel tab. It's not perfect, but so far from the headache inducing wirrwarr from before.

Definitely a work in progress, still. UI is hard :)
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #456 on: March 06, 2016, 12:11:38 PM »

Are ships properly closing into range when an enemy has been overloaded? I've seen my Enforcer XIV with a Steady officer (who had little to no flux himself) seemingly AVOID getting into range of enemies while they are overloaded even to the point where he'll slowdown. Its infuriating to see.

Happens 1 v 1 in simulator vs another Enforcer for certain.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #457 on: March 06, 2016, 12:22:08 PM »

Are ships properly closing into range when an enemy has been overloaded? I've seen my Enforcer XIV with a Steady officer (who had little to no flux himself) seemingly AVOID getting into range of enemies while they are overloaded even to the point where he'll slowdown. Its infuriating to see.

Happens 1 v 1 in simulator vs another Enforcer for certain.

Yes, pretty sure that's working correctly. When overload time runs low, they stop considering the enemy as being overloaded (so that an overload finishing doesn't come as a surprise), but with low/no flux that shouldn't really come into play. Might be you're seeing relative motion? An Enforcer can be pretty slow, and an overloaded ship *will* be trying to get away. If the Enforcer is already coasting towards its target, it might look like it's not trying to close in because it's not firing its engines.

Could also happen near the edge of the map; ships will try to avoid that area.
Logged

JohnDoe

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #458 on: March 06, 2016, 12:27:06 PM »

That has been my observation in 0.7.2a as well; I have seen many 1v1 situations between ships with no officers where one ship would refuse to close the distance without an ally nearby even if the match-up is in its advantage.
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #459 on: March 06, 2016, 12:35:37 PM »

Indeed the Enforcer is slow but I noticed that ones its flux drops to zero and it gets the flux boost... it won't use it to close in - as if it still thinks it is speed capped or, like I said, it refuses to close in.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #460 on: March 06, 2016, 12:40:15 PM »

If there *are* other allies on the field and not extremely far away, then actually, yes, they will try to avoid fighting and stall until help gets there, provided the ally is not fighting someone else already. But this only happens when smaller ships are facing larger ones, the target isn't overloaded, and the smaller ship isn't already engaged and doing well, according to some set of criteria.

This is the sort of thing where it's really hard to say whether what the AI is doing is correct or a bug, because so much depends on the context. "Not engaging an enemy ship when it theoretically might" could be the intended decision, or not.

If you can point to a simulator 1-1 (with details regarding the loadout, and preferably without officers involved, if it's still reproducible without them) where the behavior happens at least somewhat reliably, that would be a great help. Barring that, video of the incident is also helpful (though, of course a bit much to ask for in most cases). Short of these, I really can't do anything useful with this, unfortunately. It's just not clear-cut enough to point to anything specific or even be sure that it's a bug.

I did just now experiment with overloading enemy ships in the simulator, and the ship behavior seems correct - the non-overloaded ship closes in and attacks. It's not reckless about it, but it's certainly not backing off.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2016, 12:42:50 PM by Alex »
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #461 on: March 06, 2016, 01:23:00 PM »

I appreciate that something like this is a pain in the ass to test and reproduce what with there being so many variables and corner cases that could arise. If you say everything seems fine then I'll go with that and chalk it up to me missing something or other.

Heres the ship and officer in question that I noticed the behavior with - simulator battle with this ship and the two non(D) Enforcers at the same time. Once it killed the 1 ship it seemed to get spooked by the remaining one and didn't want to close in while the target was overloaded.

Spoiler
[close]
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #462 on: March 06, 2016, 02:10:08 PM »

Thanks for understanding :)

Tried the loadout and officer from your screenshot just now - well, the difference being a regular Enforcer, and heavy AC's instead of hvel drivers - vs two non (D) Enforcers in the simulator. Unfortunately (?) it looks fine - took one of them out, then I force-overloaded the other. It fired at the overloaded ship but didn't close in because its own flux was high, letting the overloaded ship drift away. Then it vented and re-engaged, finishing the fight in short order.
Logged

CaptainWinky

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #463 on: March 07, 2016, 09:54:44 AM »

I really like the changes to smuggling/cargo inspections.  I need to pick fights with some Tri-Tach fleets so that I can see how the new phase mechanics work.

Found a small bug: I spotted a pirate-themed Buffalo(D) for sale yesterday, then I noticed that its stats and price were the same as a non-D Buffalo.  I double-checked in the codex just now.  The description and the weapon mount are different but everything else is the same as a regular Buffalo.
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #464 on: March 07, 2016, 10:24:54 AM »

Well that doesn't make sense concerning the Buffalo. The pirate (D) is combat converted, has tons more weapon mounts and no shield where as the standard Buffalo is a pure freighter with a shield but only a single weapon mount. The stats should not at all be the same, lol

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 40