Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Schwartz]

Combat is the reason why to play this game.  What is the point of a well-built combat engine if you get punished for fighting as much as you want?

This is true but short-sighted. Combat is at the center of the game, but it certainly isn't alone anymore. If it was all smooth sailing and you'd never have to pay supples or fly anywhere, if all weapons and hulls were available, you might as well just play simulator battles all day. Which is always an option.

The game includes force management similar to other sandbox games. This adds many little things that work together to hopefully give the player a sense of achievement when he manages well. And there's a couple more things in the pipeline that don't really mesh with this 'combat only' argument. You keep talking about the very end-game, which is fine. But it comes across as though all these things many people clearly enjoy just don't exist. You can always use the console to effectively kill supply use and CR degradation after battles. Problem solved!

[Megas]

It is not short-sighted.  I post that because it is obvious, and that is what I bought the game key for.  Sure, a well-executed campaign layered over the combat engine will make the game even better.  Conversely, a badly implemented campaign that punishes combat will hurt the game.  Take early 0.6x.  Supply consumption was unstable (after fighting, consumption spiked and your fleet mortally bled supplies like crazy) and loot was excessive.  The only way you can loot everything is to bring at least one Atlas.  I did not have a combat fleet, if I did not have high Fleet Logistics.  Most of my Logistics was taken by Atlases, if I did not want to leave loot behind.  Even today in 0.7.x, I would like to deploy fleets against the enemy like in 0.65, but I feel pressured to solo everything with one ship because they have killer officers and my fleet is badly outnumbered, and I need to chain-battle if I get caught in a hostile system.

I am aware others like stories, grinding, micromanagement, or other gaming aspects I either care little for or get annoyed at.  Some people would like Starsector to evolve into a x4 micromanagement paradise.  I would abhor it.  I would be content if Starsector evolved into a pure arcade shmup or a modern Space Wars remake, but I am sure that would drive the x4 fans crazy.  (I did not mind Star Control 2's campaign.  It was a bit fun driving on planets with the lander scooping resources and the occasional plot coupon.)

You can always use the console

What is this console you speak of?  From a mod?  If I need to resort to a mod, I will declare "I WIN!" and move on.

[VuNut]

I'm not sure how you could have problems like that, Megas. I play with mods that make the supply/CR game harsher, and increases the number/size of death-fleets around, but I have no need to solo or chain flagships. I'm regularly hitting that deploy all button and getting back more supplies than I spent.

Maybe you should play with easy mode on. Or use the console mod and cheat logistics away (you should probably be declaring "I didn't read the planned features for this game and now I'm upset they're being implemented" though, but to each their own; get the mod and be happy).

[miljan]

CR was one of the worst additions to the game. I have two separated problems. One is CR on campaign map. It doesnt add anything, and just slows the game down. This may change in future as developer adds some thing to do more than just fight, but in its current state the combat is the main thing of the game, and CR doesnt add anything to it. The old version of supplies was several times better than what we have now, for the current version of the game.

But the biggest problem I have with the game, and hate this change, is putting arbitrary time limit  in my game battles. This is extremely bad designed, as developer doesnt know how to fix the problem of bad AI and players kitting them. My suggestion for this is to have a soft limit, so you ship doesnt stop function after some time, but maybe  lose the max speed so you can not run away anymore, but juts putting a time limit on my battles after witch my ships starts to malfunction is a horrible thing.

[Tartiflette]

   In almost every single (well designed) game you have a limiter. It can be ammo (any fps), fuel (any sim game), stamina (any combat/rpg game), morale (tactical games) or indeed an arbitrary timer (any arcade game), it can be a reinforcement system to prevent the battles from dragging on (any 4X or RTS), or it is improbable for a stalemate to occur (no impenetrable defense, forced pace, anti-kiting teleportation...).

   So saying that CR is too abstract or that it is too harsh are legitimate concerns. Or that you preferred the old principle of ballistic/limited ammo VS energy/low range. But saying it is "extremely bad designed" because it is "putting arbitrary time limit" just isn't true.

   Had it been implemented as "Reactor Heat Build-up" instead, your ship systems starting to go haywire once the power-plant's temperature pass the red line to the point the hull is taking damage from self-cooking, everyone would have intuitively understood and accepted that mechanic.

[Megas]

@ VuNut:
I do not buy games for mods.  I learned that lesson from the Quake series from the late '90s.  Excellent mod support with an uninspired basic game does not necessarily make a good game.  It just means the devs can make a good or revolutionary engine and a crummy game, and "outsource" the work to a fan community.  In other words, I think mod support can encourage devs to make a crappy vanilla and let the fans who spent money and bought the game fill-in blanks with content that should have been in the game to begin.  When I pay money for game, I want a feature complete and highly polished game.

I do not play Easy on Starsector.  I have an unfair advantage there (less damage taken), and I do not like to play with an unfair advantage (even if the AI has some of its own, like bigger fleets).  Also, Easy means less powerful enemy officers, which hurts XP gain.  You know me, I like power, and less XP means less levels, less AP/SP, and less power.  However, that applies only to vanilla.  I tend to avoid mods that increase power level too much, even if they are top notch, with Knights Templar and Neutrino being notable examples.  Much as I like to play with them (if I feel like playing with mods, which is rare), I do not use them because their content is munchkin fuel.  Sure, the game is harder at first, due to overpowered enemies, but after I survive the initial onslaught, I acquire superior hardware and become more powerful than normally possible.

I read the planned features.  I do not mind them provided they are implemented well.  If so, Starsector seems like it can become a modern Star Control 2.

[miljan]

  In almost every single (well designed) game you have a limiter. It can be ammo (any fps), fuel (any sim game), stamina (any combat/rpg game), morale (tactical games) or indeed an arbitrary timer (any arcade game), it can be a reinforcement system to prevent the battles from dragging on (any 4X or RTS), or it is improbable for a stalemate to occur (no impenetrable defense, forced pace, anti-kiting teleportation...).

   So saying that CR is too abstract or that it is too harsh are legitimate concerns. Or that you preferred the old principle of ballistic/limited ammo VS energy/low range. But saying it is "extremely bad designed" because it is "putting arbitrary time limit" just isn't true.

   Had it been implemented as "Reactor Heat Build-up" instead, your ship systems starting to go haywire once the power-plant's temperature pass the red line to the point the hull is taking damage from self-cooking, everyone would have intuitively understood and accepted that mechanic.

You have limitation, but most of games dont have time limitations. Most FPS games have plenty of ammo and weapons that have unlimited ammo also. ARPG games have unlimited stamina, that regenerates slowly if you wait. Not sure about any arcade game, as again most game do not have any type of timers. Because there are better ways of "limiting" your game than a timer.

No, CR is not that abstract to me  or too harsh, its simply an extremely bad and cheap design that most games don't use. And for a good reason. "Reactor Heat Build-up" would not change the fact that you have timed limit on your battle. Its juts fluff, and it would still be a problem, except if it was from beginning, I would not bough the game in the first place, as I dont like time limits and other similar bad/cheap mechanics in my games.

[Schwartz]

What is this console you speak of?  From a mod?  If I need to resort to a mod, I will declare "I WIN!" and move on.

I don't get it. There doesn't need to be a pure combat mode, because there is one already. It's the simulator. Why is then resorting to a mod to get that kind of thing in the campaign somehow not eligible? You're not asking for a promise to be delivered here, you're asking for something very specific that's not going to be in the scope of the game

Edit: And yeah, I was referring to this.

[Megas]

Why is then resorting to a mod to get that kind of thing in the campaign somehow not eligible?

You mentioned "console", not "simulator", in the context of removing supply use, which what I responded to.  I take it that console means pulling down a command-line interface, type some debug command, and *BOOM* stuff happens.

If you meant the simulator instead of a command-line console, then sure, I grind the simulator... after I either grind or cheat a character to level 70+ and the campaign is in a good spot.  Even then, I need to modify game files to recreate fleets I fight in the campaign.  I generally prefer campaign over simulator because I gain power fighting, and the environment is a bit more random.  Simulator is great for preparing for the worst case fights in campaign.

As for mod not eligible, realize that I love power.  The more godlike my character is, the more fun it is.  It is fun crushing the enemy like bugs.  However, adding mods solely to make my character more powerful is pointless, because the easiest mod to make is not to make one and pretend I won, because winning with max power is not hard.  If I add mods, I would be interested in expanded content mods that are close to vanilla balance.  We know the list of usual suspect mods.  Mods that add overpowered content like boss factions (e.g., Templars) do not make the game harder for long, they make the game easier by the end after the player acquires some of the extra overpowered hardware.

Realize that I am not opposed to some resource management.  I generally dislike the style used by some genres.  I like simplicity, not pointless micromanagement.

Not sure about any arcade game, as again most game do not have any type of timers. Because there are better ways of "limiting" your game than a timer.

Many arcade games had timers of some sort.  Some used score or waves cleared instead.  Most arcade games were very hard for many, or at least they did not expect the player to win or survive for hours.  Also, the point of most early arcade games (for the player) was to score as high as you can and get first place on the scoreboard.  That was sort of the point of pinball machines too, which were more common than video games during the '70s and maybe the very early '80s.

[Cyan Leader]

I'm a little confused, by daisy chaining you guys mean reinforcing the battle and transferring command, right?

Won't you lose your ship-only character skills when you do that though?

About the topic, I don't want to elaborate too much because when I started playing CR was already a thing, but having limits on battles is not "an inherent bad design choice". Gamers in general might dislike timers and being put under pressure but if you allow everyone to play as free as they want with no limitations people will start breaking the game very quickly. Through time I've come to appreciate CR, it's not perfect by all means and could use some attunement, especially with the skill revamp/industry, but things like the current phase system only became possible (in a balanced manner) with CR.

If you dislike the timer because you constantly run out of time the fix for that is already in the game. You can simply install hullmods that extend the timer or choose ships with longer peak times.

[Serenitis]

I have never really liked the CR timer, and remember the game being an almost frantic scrabble to get away from frigates asap into a destroyer, ANY destroyer simply to escape it.
But things change. I'm still not all that keen on having timers always counting down and "rushing" you to do something, but I can live with it as it is better than the alternatives:
Infinite stalemate and invicible phase ships.

If you dislike the timer because you constantly run out of time the fix for that is already in the game. You can simply install hullmods that extend the timer or choose ships with longer peak times.

This.
(Would be nice if there were some more ways of extending peak performance though.... )

[Megas]

When you transfer command, your skills apply to the new ship, and override any officer that was piloting it.

As for extending the timer with Hardened Subsystems, I already use that, once I get enough OP from skills.  For soloing fleets, Hardened Subsystems is a tier 2 must-have hullmod, up there with Resistant Flux Conduits.  Tier 1 must-have hullmods being Augmented Engines and Integrated Targeting Unit.

The four hullmods I try to put on the vast majority of ships are Augmented Engines, Integrated Targeting Unit, Resistant Flux Conduits, and Hardened Subsystems.  There are exceptions on a per-ship basis.

@ Serenitis:  Infinite stalemate would have been a thing in 0.7.1 if not for CR timer.  I have waited minutes for most Timid ships to run out of CR before my Paragon had a chance to catch up and kill them.  I am glad Timid ships are gone.

[Schwartz]

To add a positive note - as mentioned earlier I only really notice the timers when phase ships run out of steam. Which is as intended. When battles draw out into extended slugfests and CR on regular ships starts to degrade, I would actually consider that a positive. It's similar with the scarcity of command points. Both systems force you to make hard choices, and these choices translate into immersion and fun for me. Do you leave the ships in combat and risk malfunctions just to tip the balance? Do you tough it out with less ships? Do you change tactics? Either way, these events force you as a player to re-evaluate and weigh risks. This is seldom mentioned and I think the system as we have it now should be praised for it.

[Gothars]

To add a positive note - as mentioned earlier I only really notice the timers when phase ships run out of steam. Which is as intended. When battles draw out into extended slugfests and CR on regular ships starts to degrade, I would actually consider that a positive. It's similar with the scarcity of command points. Both systems force you to make hard choices, and these choices translate into immersion and fun for me. Do you leave the ships in combat and risk malfunctions just to tip the balance? Do you tough it out with less ships? Do you change tactics? Either way, these events force you as a player to re-evaluate and weigh risks. This is seldom mentioned and I think the system as we have it now should be praised for it.

I agree with that for CR, it adds many interesting choices to combat and campaign tactics. I was never positively surprised by command points, though. The only time I notice them is when I can't give all the necessary orders at the beginning of a battle, like 3 capture orders and an escort order. I really don't see any benefit for them at the start of a fight, since they can't fulfill their intended function (not being distracted  from the action by having to give orders) then anyway.

[Megas]

I wish most of the high-tech ships had cheaper deployment costs.  Many of them do not perform better than low-tech.  Wolf is kind of underwhelming (decent but does not excel at any one thing).  Omen is rubbish.  Medusa is good, but Enforcer is roughly on par with it.  Apogee is a tank, but does not outgun things like a Dominator or even Eagle.  Aurora has moved into the lemon club with Hammerhead.  Paragon is monster (and easy to use), but Onslaught is a slightly bigger monster than Paragon given enough skills and exploits.  I admit Hyperion, Tempest, and Scarab are very good and have no competition.

CR deployment costs are a bit stiff, especially with high-tech ships.  Deploy once to fight, then deploy again to eliminate survivors.  If my ships will lose a big chunk of CR after a fight, and I anticipate four or so more before I return to base, might as well deploy only one ship so that only one ship gets hurt, instead of most of my fleet.

CP is an annoyance when objectives are on the map, which is always by endgame.  I always spend two to four CP on capturing points, if I do not solo fleets.  (If I solo, they get spent on Avoid order to mark enemies and defeat fog-of-war instead.)  Capturing points is such an irritating CP sink, which is one reason why I like no objectives.  (Another reason is enemy AI does not get distracted by potential exploits involving objectives.)  Eventually, I get points in the CP skill, but only because I like that Special Ops perk that makes boarding cheap.