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 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 116

Author Topic: Starsector 0.8a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 639148 times)

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #510 on: March 29, 2017, 05:36:31 AM »

@ Tartiflette:  More like less optimal.  We do not want Sabot overcompensated to be useless, only not overwhelming against equal or smaller-sized player fleets.

I am indifferent to the Sabot change.

Baiting ammo from AI ships as the best defense feels bad.  MIRVs should become weaker regenerators again.  Currently, they are much like the original MIRV, except more damaging, and the AI wastes them.  It may save one as a revenge attack to fire right before it dies, but otherwise, it just fires n-1 MIRVs like no tomorrow.  Better just wait out the MIRV barrage with the appropriate counter.

So is the problem with Sabot missiles, the fact that due to system mechanics and how damages are handled, they're pretty much an all-aspect weapon?
Not only that, second stage Sabots evade PD and combined with anti-shield kinetic damage, and the damage is high enough to punch big holes in armor despite half damage, they are effectively unblockable.  Sabots' main weakness, aside from low ammo, is the delay before it enters the second unblockable stage, making it less ideal as a twitch punisher, but it is good for reliable damage.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2017, 05:50:38 AM by Megas »
Logged

SainnQ

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #511 on: March 29, 2017, 06:32:39 AM »

@ Tartiflette:  More like less optimal.  We do not want Sabot overcompensated to be useless, only not overwhelming against equal or smaller-sized player fleets.

I am indifferent to the Sabot change.

Baiting ammo from AI ships as the best defense feels bad.  MIRVs should become weaker regenerators again.  Currently, they are much like the original MIRV, except more damaging, and the AI wastes them.  It may save one as a revenge attack to fire right before it dies, but otherwise, it just fires n-1 MIRVs like no tomorrow.  Better just wait out the MIRV barrage with the appropriate counter.

So is the problem with Sabot missiles, the fact that due to system mechanics and how damages are handled, they're pretty much an all-aspect weapon?
Not only that, second stage Sabots evade PD and combined with anti-shield kinetic damage, and the damage is high enough to punch big holes in armor despite half damage, they are effectively unblockable.  Sabots' main weakness, aside from low ammo, is the delay before it enters the second unblockable stage, making it less ideal as a twitch punisher, but it is good for reliable damage.

So it's a mechanism flaw I guess? I know a lot of the mods use Sabot like weaponry, and they're just as powerful there too.

Logged

TheEndstoneGolem

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #512 on: March 29, 2017, 08:21:50 AM »

(How does a solid lump of metal generate EMP anyway?)

Shards of metal could sever wires, create sparks, cause short circuits?
Logged
Using an Astral with 6 Khopesh wings coz I'm that basic B)

SainnQ

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #513 on: March 29, 2017, 08:38:16 AM »

(How does a solid lump of metal generate EMP anyway?)

Shards of metal could sever wires, create sparks, cause short circuits?

Probably some mechanism related to thermodynamics and electro-magnetism of the ship shielding itself?

Too bad my science is rusty. I'm pretty sure there's a neat Hard-Science Fiction explanation for it.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #514 on: March 29, 2017, 09:30:54 AM »

I'd assume the projectiles are charged with static electricity, which discharges upon contact with the targets hull. Static discharges can reach very high voltages, enough to trigger breakers and fry delicate electronics. The obvious way to apply the charge to the projectile in the first place would be to line the launch tube with woolen sweaters.
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.

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #515 on: March 29, 2017, 09:39:56 AM »

woolen sweaters.
Next patch notes: changing sabots from missiles to socks. But what if they're socks... With bricks inside?!
More seriously, as far as I know there's no way for them to generate electricity, static or not, so I guess they're either charged before or there's some metal/alloy that electrifies with anything by doing anything. If not for arcs I'd say that sabots have nothing to do with EMP, they just go through insides and shred wires and it's simplified as EMP.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #516 on: March 29, 2017, 09:52:46 AM »

You could say that electrostatics is what propels the phase seperation - extreme charge imbalance propels the sabots away from their housing. The charge buildup on the payload is a happy byproduct.
Logged

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #517 on: March 29, 2017, 10:28:40 AM »

They were changed to single because most of the spread usually missed entirely making them weak, if not useless.
And I don't think EMP will make up for that.
actually, i think the main reason for the somewhat recent spread-to-single-shot change was that just toggling shields off for a fraction of a second could easily negate the Sabot's effect, which is problematic for a limited-ammo weapon. EMP does alleviate that issue, without the current "press to kill"-button problem when you have a lot of them.
Logged

TheEndstoneGolem

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #518 on: March 29, 2017, 12:02:01 PM »

The way Alex has worded it doesn't make sense (no offence). Charged projectiles aren't really a thing, I think it's just the fact that lumps of metal will hit wires and stuff and shut things down. Doesn't necessarily have to be an EMP.
Logged
Using an Astral with 6 Khopesh wings coz I'm that basic B)

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #519 on: March 29, 2017, 12:42:51 PM »

The way Alex has worded it doesn't make sense (no offence).
KEPs being worse at penetrating armour doesn't make sense either, but hey, it's a game. Besides creating new mechanic to achieve the same effect is pointless.

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #520 on: March 29, 2017, 01:00:31 PM »

Kinetic rounds are less effective against REACTIVE armor per-mass/accelerant than payloads of shaped explosives of the same mass. Against a solid plate armor it makes sense that a kinetic shell will do more damage but SS vessels aren't using solid plate armor, they're using
IE if you fire 100 pounds of kinetic shell at a ship with reactive armor, your round will do 0 damage to the insides of the ship & wipe out exactly 100 pounds worth of reactive armor, while also expending 100 pounds of accelerant getting your kinetic round to velocity, meaning you've expended more than the defending ship.
If you fire a HEP payload that has enough explosive compound packed in to generate the explosive force of 100 pounds of kinetic, because you're using shaped chemical rounds which detonate at point blank range you're actually firing smaller shells than the force-equivalent kinetic round & triggering (disabling) the same amount of reactive armor, using less shell and accelerant in the process.
The drawback is that HE doesn't work in a vacuum so it'd only maintain peek efficiency when striking a solid, malleable surface (armor) and otherwise, without an atmosphere helping contain the explosion, blows the explosion out into vacuum, hence it being best against armor and worst against shields (in vacuum) and hull (no solid striking surface)
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

Remmon

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #521 on: March 29, 2017, 01:33:12 PM »

Kinetic rounds are less effective against REACTIVE armor per-mass/accelerant than payloads of shaped explosives of the same mass. Against a solid plate armor it makes sense that a kinetic shell will do more damage but SS vessels aren't using solid plate armor, they're using
IE if you fire 100 pounds of kinetic shell at a ship with reactive armor, your round will do 0 damage to the insides of the ship & wipe out exactly 100 pounds worth of reactive armor, while also expending 100 pounds of accelerant getting your kinetic round to velocity, meaning you've expended more than the defending ship.
If you fire a HEP payload that has enough explosive compound packed in to generate the explosive force of 100 pounds of kinetic, because you're using shaped chemical rounds which detonate at point blank range you're actually firing smaller shells than the force-equivalent kinetic round & triggering (disabling) the same amount of reactive armor, using less shell and accelerant in the process.
The drawback is that HE doesn't work in a vacuum so it'd only maintain peek efficiency when striking a solid, malleable surface (armor) and otherwise, without an atmosphere helping contain the explosion, blows the explosion out into vacuum, hence it being best against armor and worst against shields (in vacuum) and hull (no solid striking surface)

This is not remotely how reactive armour works. Also not how energy in general works. Reactive armour is slit up into plates or sections. A hit of any kind against a section triggers that whole section to defeat the hit. In the process, the reactive armour expends itself and becomes useless. While it's not generally done currently, it is possible to put down multiple layers of reactive armour if your explosives are stable enough and your detection reliable enough to only set off as much as needed.

Due to the way reactive armour works, it works extremely well against explosively formed penetrators as used in most anti-tank missiles, but does very little against kinetic penetrators. On Earth, it is also generally ineffective against explosive attacks because we have an atmosphere and when you're using bombs against tanks, you tend to use enough bomb to blow the tank to very little pieces. In space however reactive armour would potentially work very well against explosive attacks by providing a stand off between your ship's armour and the explosion.

'solid' armour, actually made up of many different layers with spacing in between some of them would be far more effective against kinetic penetrators, while being more vulnerable to the effects of high explosive weaponry. Of course any talk of realism is a moot point, because in a realistic space combat scenario it would be nuclear warheads, not conventional explosives, against high velocity kinetic penetrators which can potentially reach velocities so high that most armour becomes ineffective.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #522 on: March 29, 2017, 01:44:13 PM »

Related note: conceptually, the armor for ships in Starsector is generally of the spaced variety (as I think is mentioned in some of the descriptions?), with lots of handwaving and random technology thrown in for good measure. Because presumably it *is* withstanding nuclear-and-above strength explosions, appreciable-fraction-of-c kinetics, etc.

But, yeah, talk of realism - while fun - ultimately is a bit moot here, since the answer is always "just come up with an explanation that makes it make sense in your head" :)
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #523 on: March 29, 2017, 01:56:20 PM »

Re: Sabots
The problems with previous shotgun Sabot were individually weak shots.  All the ship needed to do was drop shields and the fragments would hit for insignificant damage.  The AI was aware of that and always dropped shields to eat the hits.  At that point, the only use for Sabot was to force the AI to drop shield so that high-tech ship can blast enemies with blasters.  The only ships that would take damage on the shield would be those piloted by inexperienced players.
Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #524 on: March 29, 2017, 02:17:52 PM »

Re: Sabots
The problems with previous shotgun Sabot were individually weak shots.  All the ship needed to do was drop shields and the fragments would hit for insignificant damage.  The AI was aware of that and always dropped shields to eat the hits.  At that point, the only use for Sabot was to force the AI to drop shield so that high-tech ship can blast enemies with blasters.  The only ships that would take damage on the shield would be those piloted by inexperienced players.

uhhh, isn't that the point of sabots? I thought the problem with the current-build sabots is that dropping shields against sabots, even if the enemy fires nothing else, is itself a death sentence?
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 [35] 36 37 ... 116