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: The Pilgrim's Path (07/19/22)

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 146

Author Topic: Starsector 0.95a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 474326 times)

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1294
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #195 on: October 19, 2020, 07:39:49 AM »

Quote
Devastator:

    Slightly increased explosion radius and core explosion radius and slightly reduced fuse range
    More likely to hit ships, and will do more damage with its explosions due to more targets being within core radius

Is the Devastator still going to be using shotRangeVariance for its projectiles?
And if so, is it going to be set the same as it is now?

One of the reasons a lot of people don't seem too keen on this weapon is that many of its shots are effectively 'wasted' starting at ~60% of the weapon's range.
Spoiler
As an exercise for my own curiosity I removed the variance and changed the projectile range from 30 to 52 (30 * 1.75), and it doesn't seem any more powerful. But it does at least feel somewhat more satisfying seeing most of the shots get near the target before bursting.
Recoil seems to be the limiting factor - as in the Devastator has horrible recoil stats, so the shots will form a perpendicular arc at max range instead of a stripe leading away from the ship.
[close]
If you don't feel that removing the variance entirely would be desirable, would you consider adjusting the range of the projectiles up to 40-45-ish and lowering the shotRangeVariance to match?
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #196 on: October 19, 2020, 07:47:20 AM »

I feel that plenty of people complaining about need for colony babysitting and invasions etc didn't play vanilla recently and have their experience coming from Nexerlin overdose.
In my case, I refer to vanilla, unmodded gameplay when I talk about babysitting.  I have not touched Nexerelin in any of the 0.9a releases.  (Played mostly in pre-0.8a, and only once or twice during 0.8a.)

Not only do I agree wholeheartedly that the whole massive colonies thing never really felt like they fit with the game world, I'd add that I think the player should be limited to only one size 6 colony (ie, a designated capital), perhaps two size 5, and any further settlements can only be outposts (ie, for mining). Otherwise, the player will end up with a bunch of size 6 colonies and it would seem odd that the player faction's colonies are all the same size when all the ingame factions have a variety of worlds ranging from densely populated capitals to sparsely populated settlements.
Size 10^6 is only millions on the whole planet.  If anything, that seems too small on anything bigger than a small moon, especially on a good earthlike world.  That is maybe a big city or three and nothing else.  It is not like post-Collapse is reduced to caveman or medieval tech.  They still have interstellar magitech, just not as much as they had.

Also, it is not hard having 10^4 crew in an endgame fleet if built for it.  If I can plop down multiple 10^3 colonies in quick succession, it would be nice to plop a 10^4 colony instantly if I have the crew on hand.  Also, I tend to have crew and marines in the tens of thousands stockpiled in colony resources or storage.

between 1 to 10m. Which may be small on anything larger than a small moon (i mean its small on anything when you're spacefaring)

But its large within the time frame of a game because at that point you're going to be pushing the limits of immigration in creating citizens. Which means you would need to rely on natural doubling processes. Which is to say that 5% growth per year growth(which is quite high for wealthy industrial societies like spacefaring ones) would get you from 1 to 10m in 47 years (1.05^x = 10 -> xln(1.05)=ln(10) -> x= 47.19). Might as well just cut it off at size 6
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #197 on: October 19, 2020, 08:34:37 AM »

Yeah player colonies reaching 10^10 when the largest sector colonies were 10^8 made no sense to me. Apparently my colony in 10 years magically exceeds the population of the entire sector by two orders of magnitude. 10^6 seems like a reasonable limit on the time scale of the game IMO.
Logged

MakeConquestGreatAgain

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #198 on: October 19, 2020, 08:41:53 AM »

>didnt made the conquest great again

today is a sad day for the video game history...

also i agree with the trird guy above me, the devastator is awful to use because most of the shoots explode before they hit the target, i would also add that all the large point defence weapons (devastator, guardian, locust) suck.... it would be better to make them medium sized or give them a strong buff, ebcause as of now, you would be better putting a medium weapon in your large slot than puttting any of them

also also whats the deal with the warthog? just put the 3th mortar back... having 2 of them on a wing is enough of a nerf, they whent from op to COMPLETELY useless now and, form what i read, they gona be even worse, just entirelly useless
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1848
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #199 on: October 19, 2020, 08:46:45 AM »

The Paladin PD (Guardian) is getting a huge buff tho, it's in the notes. And what's the deal with the Conquest pleas for buffs? You're like the third person here saying Conquest needs a buff when it's one of the strongest ships in the game. It got quite a few buffs in previous patches.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4327
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #200 on: October 19, 2020, 09:13:09 AM »

Just want to say: Thank you Alex, for answering all these many questions, I appreciate it as always :)

I think "babysitting" only really applies to things that "just happen" at some random time, rather than things you basically explicitly signed up for doing.
Definitely. Colonies requiring extra stuff is fine, just so long as it isn't overly random. Or only able to be supplied once the colony actually demands something. Imagine putting down a colony, getting halfway to further exploration and suddenly the colony goes "actually, we need...eh, let me get out a d4 here...5d100 Food to continue working!", whereas the next colony demands 4d100 Domestic Goods, the next some amount of Luxury Goods and the next Lobster (for some inexplicable reason) or what have you. That'd be...less than ideal.

You could probably integrate this into the colonization screen pretty easily, I'd say, the one that says you need 1000 dudes, 100 Heavy Machinery and 200 Supplies to found a colony. Have another box below that lists what specific things that particular planet will need for a colony to reach the point where it'll be self-sufficient depending on the planet's conditions - say that every colony needs some amount of food/goods to tide them over until they can establish their own food sources, but planets with Destabilized Subpopulation specifically requires some amount of Marines to keep the initial colonists safe, tectonically active planets need additional supplies/heavy machinery to reinforce structures and build warning systems, High Gravity planets can require Heavy Armaments ("Humans require powered exoskeletons for regular movement and find even basic actions exhausting", which could be a part of the Heavy Armaments item, like power armor style?), etc.

The only real detail to remember (that I can come up with off the top of my head) is how to make sure that secondary list of required items is accessible remotely, without being at the specific planet. If the amount of items you need per hazard condition is static you could just look it up on a wiki and calculate it, or run around the core looking for planets with the right conditions and calculate what you need from that, but ideally it'd just be available from the Intel screen. That shouldn't be hard to add, though, I don't think.

Mh, that way you'd just dump in everything they will need at the beginning and forget about it, I don't really see the difference to the current system. To me the appeal is in actually taking care of your colony for a while. What differentiates that from annoying babysitting is that a) that phase has a foreseeable end and b) you have control over when to take growth-enhancing missions, they shouldn't distract you from what you are otherwise doing, like constant invasion fleets do.
I agree that simple fetch quests are not very interesting (but then again, some people like trade missions). But escorting your colony's very first trade fleet on its maiden voyage would be interesting, for example.

I like the idea that a colony's initial requirements are influences by the planetary conditions.


also i agree with the trird guy above me, the devastator is awful to use because most of the shoots explode before they hit the target, i would also add that all the large point defence weapons (devastator, guardian, locust) suck.... it would be better to make them medium sized or give them a strong buff, ebcause as of now, you would be better putting a medium weapon in your large slot than puttting any of them

also also whats the deal with the warthog? just put the 3th mortar back... having 2 of them on a wing is enough of a nerf, they whent from op to COMPLETELY useless now and, form what i read, they gona be even worse, just entirelly useless

I think the decreased range might be a buff for the Warthog, with it's slow speed it spends too much time running from one target to the next and getting separated from other wings, otherwise. Well, and it gets three fighters, so overall it seems much better now?

Devastator is also buffed with a bigger splash radius.
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.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #201 on: October 19, 2020, 09:15:56 AM »

Locusts are great? Using them as PD is not the best, but they will definitely help clear out fighters. They're really good at providing finishing damage for zero flux at range, and they have tons of ammo to last into a fight. They also are good at saturating PD to let other missiles and bombers through.

Also, conquest is quite well balanced atm, I'm not sure why people are upset that it hasn't been buffed.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 10627
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #202 on: October 19, 2020, 09:18:28 AM »

Locusts is the best general-purpose large missile.  Enough ammo to last minutes of fighting, and PD generally cannot fully stop it.  A pair from a Conquest is nearly an unavoidable kill against frigates.  Even battleships will take noticeable damage from it if the whole burst hits hull.  The only other missile that might compete with Locusts is a MIRV fully powered up by both skills and ECCM.

Conquest is good enough, and seems on par for its cost.

Warthog's third fighter will be restored.  3x3+bug was too strong, 2x2 is too weak.  Next will be 3x2.
Logged

CoverdInBees

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #203 on: October 19, 2020, 09:33:51 AM »

Locusts tend to be my default large missile too. Though i too use them more for multi-purpose than strictly anti-fighter.
If anti fighter was the only thing they could be used for i agree they'd look pretty "meh", but when you realize it's not hyper specialized like that but actually useful in a large variety of situations their performance in that role looks a lot more respectable. (jacks of all trades aren't supposed to be the be-all-end-all in each of their trades after all)

As for Conquest, i really don't have enough experience on the capital side of the game to accurately rank and compare them to each other but when properly/decently specced i can at least safely say it's pretty powerful in it's own right, and i'm more than happy to shell out the 40 DP for it.
Logged

Arcagnello

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
  • Arguably Heretical, Definetly Insane
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #204 on: October 19, 2020, 10:01:06 AM »

I was actually playing when this realization came into my head whilst thinking about the patchnotes:

Pirate Base Bounties are getting nerfed
+
Hammerhead is also getting a nerf and can't safely use the front two small mounts for anything but PD
+
Bases will not be damaged unless the body part in question is hit

Methinks someone has been a very naughty boy and has been cheesing pirate bases with an Overridden Hammerhead and its two Assault Chainguns  ::)


Speaking of Bases and Battlestations, I'm under the opinion that the High Tech base needs a shield arc buff as the non-ultimate versions has very big gaps where the future extension would be wich results in it being overly vulnerable mid game when compared to the other base types.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2020, 10:04:01 AM by Arcagnello »
Logged
Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.
The therapist removed my F5 key.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 20595
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #205 on: October 19, 2020, 10:06:47 AM »

Honestly, by this point, shouldn't the 'real' map be the default? The 'pretty' map, as pretty as it is, is sorely not useful in the least as an actual map for navigation, and without a doubt a lot of players miss that little hotkey, and generally the hotkeys on the map screen, so even the fuel limits would be helpful to come pre-loaded.

Those are all fair points. But the stars look pretty, so... look, let me have this one.

(A somewhat more salient point: I do think it's important to have a real-space view of the Sector visible in the game somewhere, just to make it feel like a "real" bunch of stars somewhere.)

I'm strangely impressed by the 'Move Slowly' change, which seems like a really elegant way to neaten up the small gameplay things around that.

Ah, thank you! (I do feel like that reduced things down fairly nicely, as far as all the movement-related *stuff* that was going on. Possibly some room for improvement, still, but at least it's in a place I feel ok with.)

I feel that plenty of people complaining about need for colony babysitting and invasions etc didn't play vanilla recently and have their experience coming from Nexerlin overdose.

Hmm - does Nexerelin adjust punitive expeditions etc? I've been kind of assuming that whenever I hear about that, it's a vanilla thing, but it'd be good to know if it's in fact different in Nex.


Hey Alex, keep up the incredible work.  I'm really excited to see 4k and UI updates are coming, being one of the people that loves playing this game in ultrawide in all its glory.  Thanks for what you do!

Thank you!



Besides that, I'd also like to not have too create a fully functioning colony to provide resources to the faction. I'd like the whole vast resources available in space aspect to be leaned further into - drop one lonely guy in an inflated balloon in charge of corralling a bevy of automated mining drones and their tenders in a ring system, mined out nickel-iron asteroids spun up for super cheap habitat space (no antimatter powered grav generators for the poor), lean into the whole 'these planets are *** and we have to make do' aspect of the Persean Sector. It's not as though there isn't the technology to do great things, but there's so much squabbling between the factions that no one's using the resources to do anything - until you the PC explodes upon the scene.

Hmm. On the one hand, that could work, but on the other hand, it seems tricky to integrate nicely with colonies. So just in general this is a "fairly unlikely maybe", I'd say - if there are *other* reasons that come up that make this desirable (i.e. if this resolves some other design issue), this could well happen, but for its own sake, probably not.

Basically Alex, I just want to put a particle collider around a gas giant and start mass-manufacturing supermaterials - these stars won't harvest themselves!

(Also John C. Wright has some fascinating stuff in his two space opera series)

Yeah, I can get behind that! (And, hey, you'll definitely be able to put something around a gas giant in the next release. A couple of things, actually. And the stars won't harvest themselves, indeed.)

(Thanks for the book rec!)


Definitely. Colonies requiring extra stuff is fine, just so long as it isn't overly random. Or only able to be supplied once the colony actually demands something. Imagine putting down a colony, getting halfway to further exploration and suddenly the colony goes "actually, we need...eh, let me get out a d4 here...5d100 Food to continue working!", whereas the next colony demands 4d100 Domestic Goods, the next some amount of Luxury Goods and the next Lobster (for some inexplicable reason) or what have you. That'd be...less than ideal.

Gotcha, yeah - same page here. But e.g. "you need X amount of <whatever> for the colony to get to the next step towards taking off on its own" but there's no rush/consequences if you don't do it now now now sounds reasonable.

I'd just like to note that Frigates and Destroyers individually have killed me more often than Cruisers and Capitals combined. So in terms of fleets that have an actual record of making Swiss cheese of my hull ::)...

I think "oh it's just a Kite with Reapers" has a winning record against player flagships overall.



Not only do I agree wholeheartedly that the whole massive colonies thing never really felt like they fit with the game world, I'd add that I think the player should be limited to only one size 6 colony (ie, a designated capital), perhaps two size 5, and any further settlements can only be outposts (ie, for mining). Otherwise, the player will end up with a bunch of size 6 colonies and it would seem odd that the player faction's colonies are all the same size when all the ingame factions have a variety of worlds ranging from densely populated capitals to sparsely populated settlements.

Welcome to the forum, btw!

I think the hazard rating mechanics will natrually add some size spread to colonies, basically doing this - a high hazard mining colony would stay small unless you invested a lot into putting more population there. I'm not 100% sure actually how the economics of this work out - whether increasing colony size to 6 in a case like that would be a net profit or not, actually. It depends on what it's exporting etc. Since you'd be getting, likely, some flat bonuses from AI cores/items/improvements/etc, getting a few more points of production out of a higher size - at high expense, to boot - might not be worth it. Will have to see, though.


In my case, I refer to vanilla, unmodded gameplay when I talk about babysitting.  I have not touched Nexerelin in any of the 0.9a releases.  (Played mostly in pre-0.8a, and only once or twice during 0.8a.)

Gotcha.


Is the Devastator still going to be using shotRangeVariance for its projectiles?
And if so, is it going to be set the same as it is now?

One of the reasons a lot of people don't seem too keen on this weapon is that many of its shots are effectively 'wasted' starting at ~60% of the weapon's range.
Spoiler
As an exercise for my own curiosity I removed the variance and changed the projectile range from 30 to 52 (30 * 1.75), and it doesn't seem any more powerful. But it does at least feel somewhat more satisfying seeing most of the shots get near the target before bursting.
Recoil seems to be the limiting factor - as in the Devastator has horrible recoil stats, so the shots will form a perpendicular arc at max range instead of a stripe leading away from the ship.
[close]
If you don't feel that removing the variance entirely would be desirable, would you consider adjusting the range of the projectiles up to 40-45-ish and lowering the shotRangeVariance to match?

Well - the shots blowing up early is the Devastator's thing. The point is that it's a weapon that:
1) Is good vs fighters/missiles, which get close naturally and are just more affected by it covering a wide area, and, importantly,
2) A weapon that becomes potentially highly damaging vs ships when used at close range

(If you increase the "range" from 30 to 52, that's actually a huge nerf - it means that it can never hit for full damage with the core of the explosion, since it'll always explode before it gets close enough. So that might explain which removing shot range variance, in tandem with that change, didn't make it more powerful.)

So, basically, what the current set of changes is doing is going in the opposite direction - making the shots more powerful, but keeping its core nature, where what you've tried makes the shots weaker but removes the dropoff in effectiveness with range. Well, doesn't remove entirely - since the inaccuracy is still there - but goes in that direction.

Keep in mind that it's pretty cheap flux-wise, too!

Just want to say: Thank you Alex, for answering all these many questions, I appreciate it as always :)

:D I appreciate all the interest and the feedback!

Mh, that way you'd just dump in everything they will need at the beginning and forget about it, I don't really see the difference to the current system. To me the appeal is in actually taking care of your colony for a while. What differentiates that from annoying babysitting is that a) that phase has a foreseeable end and b) you have control over when to take growth-enhancing missions, they shouldn't distract you from what you are otherwise doing, like constant invasion fleets do.
I agree that simple fetch quests are not very interesting (but then again, some people like trade missions). But escorting your colony's very first trade fleet on its maiden voyage would be interesting, for example.

I think the key difference is "will something bad happen if I don't address this when I wasn't planning to".

I like the idea that a colony's initial requirements are influences by the planetary conditions.

Yeah, I like that a lot too.


Methinks someone has been a very naughty boy and has been cheesing pirate bases with an Overridden Hammerhead and its two Assault Chainguns  ::)

(Team Shrike all the way here. I love piloting that ship.)


Speaking of Bases and Battlestations, I'm under the opinion that the High Tech base needs a shield arc buff as the non-ultimate versions has very big gaps where the future extension would be wich results in it being overly vulnerable mid game when compared to the other base types.

Hmm - with proper weapons, a high tech station can be hard to get to, really. Pirates don't really have them, though. And having those gaps to exploit is very much the idea, so if it needs a buff, it ought to come from somewhere other than removing its key characteristic!
Logged

Arcagnello

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
  • Arguably Heretical, Definetly Insane
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #206 on: October 19, 2020, 10:18:18 AM »

Hmm - with proper weapons, a high tech station can be hard to get to, really. Pirates don't really have them, though. And having those gaps to exploit is very much the idea, so if it needs a buff, it ought to come from somewhere other than removing its key characteristic!

Give the combat modules phase cloak when they're out of the shield

I figured that gap would be some sort of weakpoint of the station first time I saw it, but those those thrice-damned shield modules are so bloody hard to kill sometimes, spinning around and hiding behind the other modules and whatnot, trying to snipe them between the gaps in the shield it right up the alley to Star Wars :P

Anyway, I don't really possess many bright ideas as to how high tech bases can be buffed up a bit aside from that very heretical idea that just had to be barred in the hopes you don't read it and make everyone get PTSD from their first high tech battlestation. It's true that the range of the high tech battlestation is quite great but the actual DPS on targets with plenty of flux capacity/dissipation to just absorb the damage could even be called trivial in some cases.



Logged
Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.
The therapist removed my F5 key.

IronBorn

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #207 on: October 19, 2020, 10:38:47 AM »

The fleets of 30 capitals sounds kind of bad, especially from a lore perspective. Will such fleets be rare? Would be cool if they are named, persistent fleets that pop up on the intelligence screen when created. Hunting down and destroying such a fleet would weaken a faction and it would take them some time to build such a fleet again. Major hostile actions, like losing a colony, would drastically accelerate the creation of the next fleet. Named fleets officers would also level, to be a consistent threat to the player.

Hmm - I'm not sure where you're getting the "fleet of 30 capitals" from; there's nothing that's like that! If you can clarify, I can respond better.
[/quote]

I think I misread a comment somewhere about concern that the fleet cap would cause capital heavy fleets, but the patch notes say the fleets will be better balanced.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #208 on: October 19, 2020, 10:46:45 AM »

I think the hazard rating mechanics will natrually add some size spread to colonies, basically doing this - a high hazard mining colony would stay small unless you invested a lot into putting more population there. I'm not 100% sure actually how the economics of this work out - whether increasing colony size to 6 in a case like that would be a net profit or not, actually. It depends on what it's exporting etc. Since you'd be getting, likely, some flat bonuses from AI cores/items/improvements/etc, getting a few more points of production out of a higher size - at high expense, to boot - might not be worth it. Will have to see, though.

My concern with this based on the current version of the game is that high hazard colonies tend to really lag behind other colonies in profits until they get big. So now if they are forced to be small, then it feels like the will never be as good as low hazard colonies. Do you feel like small mining colonies are valuable enough to be worthwhile over other colonies? The player can only manage a finite number so it feels like in the pursuit of making high hazard mining colonies thematically small, you might make them not very good in general. Unless the in-faction supply bonuses have been increased significantly, or the balance of profits for really good ore resources has changed, I can't really see a small mining colony with only one or two industries being useful. I'd rather just have another size 6 titan colony with 3 big production industries.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 10627
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #209 on: October 19, 2020, 11:10:18 AM »

There is one reason for size 3 colonies - no Pather cells!  Load it up all size 3 worlds with all of the cores player may want, including alpha admin, and Pathers will not bother that planet.  Would be nice if there was an immigration lock to prevent colonies from growing at all.  (It gets annoying removing spaceport to tank growth then rebuild it later.)

Gas giants with low enough hazard (about 150%) and high volatiles is a good colony candidate.  That was my first colony in the last game I played.  Being able to jump directly on the planet without T. Jump is also convenient.  For industries, Mining and Military Base/High Command are a given.  Later, Heavy Industry (no forge) to boost production per month, and maybe Light Industry.

Quote
My concern with this based on the current version of the game is that high hazard colonies tend to really lag behind other colonies in profits until they get big.
Another problem is slower growth.  It is a pain to synch grow with other planets, which is important when I want to avoid shortages when one planet grows bigger first and gets shortages while the other planet(s) catch up.  However, that is only a problem when sizes reach 7 and up, which will be moot by size 6 limit.

However, high hazard may be useful if I want stunted size 3 planets that cannot grow to size 4 for the sector wide colonization through alpha cores.  Income from Pop&Inf from hundreds of worlds may be a way for high income.  (That was a plan I would try for income after a total core kill.)

For resources, I look for anything with 150% hazard or less and enough resources for self-sufficiency.  Since my late-game goal is total core kill (which kills all trade income), with ultimate endgame goal being full sector colonization (with alpha cores), all resources mean to me in the long run is self-sufficiency for my colonies.

P.S.  About high-tech stations.
The tier 1 station is not too bad.  Wait until the shield gaps overlap with the generators, blow them up, and the shields fall down.  Too bad the AI is not smart enough to do little more than mindlessly shoot straight ahead at the shields.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2020, 11:15:58 AM by Megas »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 146