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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 146

Author Topic: Starsector 0.95a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 596134 times)

CoverdInBees

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #240 on: October 20, 2020, 05:49:46 AM »


Mh, I think you are confusing "every person that plays Startsector" with "many that play Startsector and are actively discussing it on the internet". The latter is a self selecting group that does not represent the whole playerbase, a vocal minority of of sorts.

I believe most players are simply picking options that seem fun or exciting to them.

Exactly.

As for me, i've read up plenty on most aspects of SS over the 11 months or so since i bought it, and i still don't min/max much of anything even though that gives me the knowledge to do so (or at least try).
It's a single player game, and not that difficult once you get the hang of it (at least once you've built up a nice core of ships), so why would I? I'd rather sacrifice some of the min maxing for doing things that make "role playing" sense.
Logged

AcaMetis

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #241 on: October 20, 2020, 05:50:37 AM »

The idea is to stop people from forcing themselves into gameplay that is not fun, because they feel they have to play "optimally" or "max out everything".
What would force players to sit around for 20-30 ingame years to watch colonies grow from size 6 to size 7? It's not a requirement to unlock the super secret final boss (I'm assuming), all it does is make a few numbers bigger. And not in a way that's likely to make any sort of difference by that point. I don't recall anyone feeling forced to sit around until their colonies reach size 10 in the current patch, I don't understand why it would become a problem in the upcoming one.
Logged

Orochi

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Ego Ex Nihilo
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #242 on: October 20, 2020, 06:28:01 AM »


Mh, I think you are confusing "every person that plays Startsector" with "many that play Startsector and are actively discussing it on the internet". The latter is a self selecting group that does not represent the whole playerbase, a vocal minority of of sorts.

I believe most players are simply picking options that seem fun or exciting to them.

You're right. I can't speak for people who don't actively discuss their opinions. However, its the same both ways. Calling the 'many people that actively discuss the game online' a vocal minority with no proof the majority is unlike it is probably even less like to be correct than my assumption that they at least speak for a great part of the player base.

Perhaps I should limit it to "Almost everyone that voices their opinion on Starsector shows munchkin tendencies". I suppose I should also specify what I'm talking about.

When people pick options 'for fun' in games like Star Sector, they usually must also pick options that are optimized to counter balance it unless they don't care about making progress or essentially running their saves into the ground. Most of the things that I'm talking about, most people wouldn't event think about as Min-maxing, like picking a Buffalo over a Tarsus... which is totally min-maxing the logistical profile of your fleet. Or settling in a system with lots of moons to stack your defenses.

Lots of the stuff that people consider 'just the thing you do', like take Transverse Jump asap, is Munchkin min-maxing. The fact that not doing those things is considered either new-player behavior or an intentional role-play/difficulty increase is proof enough that most people that play this game are, to an extent min-maxing munchkins, even if they don't take every opportunity to be as optimal as possible.

This is supported by just about any discussion related to ship fitting that isn't a meme, as well as the fact that probably half the time most people play the game is spent there. Even if they aren't breaking out calculators and looking at graphs, they tend to be min-maxing so that they can support some kind of cool option.
Logged
I am thematically appropriate

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #243 on: October 20, 2020, 06:45:41 AM »

For one or two games, I did not take Navigation because I wanted three more skill points for combat skills.  Eventually, I got fed up with bringing extra tugs and tankers, not to mention crossing pulsar beams repeatedly because pirate bases kept respawning in neutron star systems, and eventually got Navigation.

In my latest game, I did not want to take Sensors 1 because I wanted the skill point for something else.  Eventually, I had a pirate base bounty in Penelope's Star that I spent thirty minutes trying to find, but could not.  Usual tricks to find the base ended in failure.  I grabbed Neutrino Detector and it revealed the base hidden in the outermost asteroid belt, too far from planets, relays, and other stuff that are usually close by.  I consider Sensors 1 mandatory for the rare times a pirate base spawns in an unusual spot that makes it almost impossible to find without neutrino detector.

Most of all, I like colonies, but not pather cells, so I spent nine skill points in Industry solely for colony skills, and considered Planetary Operations in Leadership for the stability bonus (effectively +1 colony).  After finding out Pathers were bugged, I felt buyer's remorse because those points wasted in colony skills ended up gimping my combat power (because points I wanted in combat went to colonies because I also wanted to be a space lord with a big empire).  Alpha cores are unlimited (provided the Nexus is left alone to spawn unlimited Ordos), but skill points are not.  No respec makes it worse.

At least next release will have respec, although Alex wrote there may be individual exceptions.
Logged

DancingMonkey

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #244 on: October 20, 2020, 07:07:51 AM »

Only read the OP so sorry if you already answered;

Is it possible to make the move slowly key a toggle on? Maybe by a setting?

Thanks!
« Last Edit: October 20, 2020, 07:13:02 AM by DancingMonkey »
Logged

Toxcity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #245 on: October 20, 2020, 07:14:34 AM »

I'm just excited since this patch seems to be giving life to the midgame. Hopefully the fleet composition changes make the bounty progression smoother too.
Logged

ProfessionalHuman

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #246 on: October 20, 2020, 07:51:56 AM »

Wow, that's not a patch, that's a whole new game! Really excited about patch notes (especially personal contacts). One of the best games i played. Keep up the great work!

If it isn't too late to add something in the upcoming patch, can we have a toggable ship control mode when camera is fixed to the ship and turns around with it? Right now if i turn my ship 180 degrees (when it's nose is pointing to the bottm side of the screen) controls changes like so:
  • W - ship moves down
  • A - ship moves right
  • S - ship moves up
  • D - ship moves left
I understand, that technically controls are correct, but this is very confusing and is the reason why i not pilot frigates/any fast and agile ships. I searched through forum and i am not only one having this problem. But, unfortunatly, i havent found any solution.

P.S.: English is not my native language, so sorry for any mistakes.
Logged

CoverdInBees

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #247 on: October 20, 2020, 07:56:32 AM »

If that was changed and the keys mean "move north/south/west/east" instead then how do you see that working when your ship is pointed diagonally? Should the ship just half move forward/half strafe? Changing this would mean you can just move into 8 directions too.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #248 on: October 20, 2020, 08:26:50 AM »

@ ProfessionalHuman: Welcome to the forum! The control scheme you are proposing has actually been tried early on, but was found to be disorienting. You can read more here, if you like: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8643.0


When people pick options 'for fun' in games like Star Sector, they usually must also pick options that are optimized to counter balance it unless they don't care about making progress or essentially running their saves into the ground. Most of the things that I'm talking about, most people wouldn't event think about as Min-maxing, like picking a Buffalo over a Tarsus... which is totally min-maxing the logistical profile of your fleet. Or settling in a system with lots of moons to stack your defenses.

Lots of the stuff that people consider 'just the thing you do', like take Transverse Jump asap, is Munchkin min-maxing. The fact that not doing those things is considered either new-player behavior or an intentional role-play/difficulty increase is proof enough that most people that play this game are, to an extent min-maxing munchkins, even if they don't take every opportunity to be as optimal as possible.



Well, if you define "munchkin" broadly enough to include everybody trying to play the game successfully, than most people will fall into the category, yes. Before you talked about everybody number crunching and glassing the entire Sector, though.

To me its important that the game is open enough to define your own success. For some that might be galactic conquest, for others exploring the Sector, building a beautiful colony, being a great smuggler or bounty hunter or making friends with the Pirates. For these different playstyles there are different optimal skills, so in the end they all have a reason to exist.

Only read the OP so sorry if you already answered;

Is it possible to make the move slowly key a toggle on? Maybe by a setting?

Thanks!

Pretty sure its gonna be a toggle?
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.

ANGRYABOUTELVES

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
  • AE ALTADOON GHARTOK PADHOME
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #249 on: October 20, 2020, 09:24:02 AM »

I think making the Light Needler 7 OP is a mistake. It still won't be useful for ships that want more sustained kinetic pressure, and on ships that can fully utilize the burst like the Sunder or Doom it'll be undercosted. The Railgun nerf is appropriate, though.
Logged

Shoat

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #250 on: October 20, 2020, 09:24:50 AM »

So if a guy wants to play extremely long games where a size 7 colony won't take 30 cycles but thanks to his min-maxing will only take 20 cycles to complete.... shouldn't we let him have it? It's not a massive upgrade and he won't feel like he's arbitrarily locked out of having a "real planet". It's just that like a "real planet", it will happen over a course of decades or centuries and not just years.

The idea is to stop people from forcing themselves into gameplay that is not fun, because they feel they have to play "optimally" or "max out everything". If just some people who really want to hang around in a save for 50 years were to see the colonies grow to size 7, that would not be a problem. But if people hang around in the game, actually bored out of their mind, just to see that number change from 6 to 7, that's bad game design.

"Just forbid it completely" is the nuclear option, though, and should be used as a last resort in the most extreme cases only.
Way too many games do this way too often - completely forbidding players from doing certain things because there *may* be a difficult design decision somewhere down the road there.

In this particular case, I think it's extremely important that we be allowed to potentially grow colonies as large as all the pre-existing factions' colonies (given enough time and economic boom to draw in population), even if it is not required to succeed within the main gameplay loop, or likely to happen in any average campaigns.
A hard-limit that entirely takes this off the table from the very get-go is kind of taking me out of the "your faction is a real faction" vibe that I want. One of the most amazing strengths of this game is that I am using the same ships, the same mechanics to equip those ships, to staff them with officers, etc. as the NPCs. For the most part it feels like I am playing the same game as them, and that is good. Similarly, the core fantasy of being able to start my own faction is that I am playing on an equal playing field with the big guys and can also get to where they are if I surpass enough hardships (which is also what makes starting your own faction in mount&blade so satisfying, RP-wise), but it kinda takes some of the wind out of the sails if I know from the get-go that there is an insurmountable upper barrier that cannot be surpassed no matter what.

I mean yes, sure, there are some extremely obsessive players who inflict harm upon themselves if given freedom, but that is a poor excuse to take things away from ALL players. Because you cannot reasonably sift through every single part of the entire game and cut out or limit stuff that promotes obsessiveness, and do whatever needs to be done to your game to ensure nobody hurts their enjoyment by obsessing over something. If you did, what would even be left of starsector? Every part of this game is obsessiveness-bait.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2020, 09:29:23 AM by Shoat »
Logged

duckasick

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #251 on: October 20, 2020, 10:20:51 AM »

I really love game devs like you. You give just enough info to make me get really excited about what's next, but you don't give any big spoilers. I really can't wait for the new raiding mechanics and story content!

Also, completly off-topic, but are there any mods that interest you content or gameplay wise?
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #252 on: October 20, 2020, 10:26:31 AM »

A hard-limit that entirely takes this off the table from the very get-go is kind of taking me out of the "your faction is a real faction" vibe that I want. One of the most amazing strengths of this game is that I am using the same ships, the same mechanics to equip those ships, to staff them with officers, etc. as the NPCs. For the most part it feels like I am playing the same game as them, and that is good. Similarly, the core fantasy of being able to start my own faction is that I am playing on an equal playing field with the big guys and can also get to where they are if I surpass enough hardships (which is also what makes starting your own faction in mount&blade so satisfying, RP-wise), but it kinda takes some of the wind out of the sails if I know from the get-go that there is an insurmountable upper barrier that cannot be surpassed no matter what.
My first or second thought about factions exceeding the limit while I cannot is to sat bomb them down to size (6) if I do not want to destroy them outright (for purposes of income), especially if their expeditions are too big.  If I cannot have big colonies like them, no one can!

I would like to reach size 10^7 on my primary colonies like most major factions.  I guess 10^6 is okay.
Logged

Hiruma Kai

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #253 on: October 20, 2020, 10:42:53 AM »

In terms of game mechanics, capping out player colony growth at size 6 seems fine to me.  It is arbitrary, but so was size 9 or 10.  If credits earned and monthly ship production is where it needs to be, it doesn't really affect game play in the end.  Soft capped growth is an option but I don't see it as compelling.  The point of the game isn't to make the biggest colonies, it is to fly around and blow spaceships up.  Size 6 colonies can supply sufficient credits and material already to allow you to completely lose your personal fleet and recover quickly.

There are a number of other things in game that the player can't do that NPCs can.  For example, field multiple <Redacted> capitals.  In addition, NPC fleets don't spend credits or supplies, or have other player facing issues.  Similarly, there are things the player can do which NPCs can't.  Like settle new world or even have their worlds grow.   Which already makes the player faction completely unlike a pre-existing faction.

There are a number of factions which don't have size 7 or 8 worlds.  Tri-tachyon maxes at 6, Pirates, Independents and Pathers cap at size 5.  So a newly settled player faction caps out like some of the smaller factions already present.  If the player can grow a size 8 world over the course of decades, why shouldn't Tri-tachyon also be able to do so?  That of course adds more mechanics and late game issues to balance.

Given the easy to modify nature of the game, I think as a core vanilla limit, size 6 is fine, and if someone wants their "Long war" mod that lets you play with interesting game play for decades and eventually become as large as the Hegemony, then the subset of players interested in it will grab that mod.  Presumably Alex can make that number easy to change, and given the fact NPC worlds larger exist, should work naturally.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.95a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #254 on: October 20, 2020, 11:00:08 AM »

With regards to the population cap, I don't think the argument 'the player should be able to do whatever they want' holds water. There's a 10^10 cap in the current game. The idea that you put a cap on growth at some reasonable limit so the player doesn't feel obligated to expand forever is already a part of the game and I've never seen anyone complain about it.

I can understand people who want to be able do whatever the AI does, but that's also not a requirement, it's a preference.

It makes no gameplay difference where the cap is set, since the factions and core are static/scripted so that they can be balanced with whatever the player is allowed to do. Colony size has no significance other than income in the current game, and since income can be independently tuned, it's actually just a matter of 'feeling' which is totally subjective. As long as the rest of the gameplay is balanced, it really doesn't matter to me.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 146